China's economic miracle over the past three decades has been featured with its open-door policy, especially the absorption of foreign capital. One downside effect of economic reform has been the ever rising interregional inequality. As FDI is highly unevenly distributed across regions, many scholars and policymakers have blamed their inflows as one of the main factors driving the Chinese regions apart. If this logic were true, then controlling the scale of FDI could be a solution to reduce regional inequality. However, it is difficult to reconcile the positive effect of FDI on economic growth with its potential 'negative' effect on regional inequality. This is a controversial and provocative issue in the economic development literature. Using the largest panel dataset covering all the Chinese regions over the entire period 1979-2003 and employing an augmented Cobb-Douglas production function, this paper proves that FDI has been an important factor responsible for regional growth differences in China. However, it suggests that FDI cannot be blamed for causing regional inequality; it is the uneven distribution of FDI instead of FDI itself that has caused regional growth differences. The key policy issue is that FDI should be guided towards the inland areas with preferential policies in order to improve the spatial allocation of investments as a means to reduce regional inequality.
This study investigates the dynamic relationship between stock return volatility and trading volume for individual stocks listed on the Chinese stock market as well as market portfolios of these stocks. We found that the inclusion of trading volume, which is used as a proxy of information arrival, in the GARCH specification reduces the persistence of the conditional variance dramatically, and the volume effect is positive and statistically significant in all the cases for individual stocks. Consistent with our analysis of the institutional and ownership structure of listed Chinese companies, trading volume is found to play a role of proxies of information arrivals for the two B share portfolios, but not for the two A share portfolios. Our conclusion is that the information-based effect helps in explaining the GARCH effect to a large extent. Nevertheless, GARCH does not completely vanish as a result of this inclusion.Trading volume, stock market return volatility, GARCH models, China,
China's economic miracle over the past three decades has been featured with its open-door policy, especially the absorption of foreign capital. One downside effect of economic reform has been the ever rising interregional inequality. As FDI is highly unevenly distributed across regions, many scholars and policymakers have blamed their inflows as one of the main factors driving the Chinese regions apart. If this logic were true, then controlling the scale of FDI could be a solution to reduce regional inequality. However, it is difficult to reconcile the positive effect of FDI on economic growth with its potential 'negative' effect on regional inequality. This is a controversial and provocative issue in the economic development literature. Using the largest panel dataset covering all the Chinese regions over the entire period 1979-2003 and employing an augmented Cobb-Douglas production function, this paper proves that FDI has been an important factor responsible for regional growth differences in China. However, it suggests that FDI cannot be blamed for causing regional inequality; it is the uneven distribution of FDI instead of FDI itself that has caused regional growth differences. The key policy issue is that FDI should be guided towards the inland areas with preferential policies in order to improve the spatial allocation of investments as a means to reduce regional inequality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.