Summary:
Extensive research finds that traditional culture is a key determinant of firm value and overall economic growth. This study attempts to shift the research focus to the impact of cultural value systems on behavioral norms within the financial industry. We explore a unique cultural characteristic of the regions where small and medium-sized financial institutions (SMFIs) are located—merchant guild culture—and the behavioral norms it induces, such as regional trust, financial literacy, and interpersonal relationships. This cultural milieu may help SMFIs adhere to their social objectives while achieving financial sustainability, thereby mitigating the likelihood of mission drift and contributing to the development of a more inclusive financial service system. Using panel data on SMFIs from 2010 to 2020, we investigate the possible link between merchant guild culture and mission drift of SMFIs. First, following prior literature on culture and finance, such as studies on religion and Confucian thought (Du, 2019; Zhang et al., 2021), we construct a set of merchant guild culture variables based on geographical proximity. Secondly, to capture the service orientation of SMFIs in supporting small and micro enterprises (SMEs) and agricultural communities, we employ the breadth of poverty alleviation coverage as a proxy for mission drift. Specifically, we gauge mission drift using two key indicators: the proportion of loans to SMEs and the proportion of agriculture loans. Our empirical results show that merchant guild culture has a significant inhibitory effect on the mission drift of SMFIs. A one-standard-deviation increase in the influence of merchant guild culture reduces the degree of mission drift by 4.57% when measured by the proportion of loans to small and micro enterprises, and by 2.77% when measured by the proportion of agriculture loans. The conclusions remain robust after employing instrumental variables using regional average elevation, propensity score matching (PSM) methods to mitigate endogeneity issues and controlling for random factor disturbances and omitted variables. Moreover, we explore the impact of the formal institutional environment and the development level of digital inclusive finance in each region on our research conclusions. The results show that in regions with limited government intervention, more developed private economy, and advanced digital inclusive finance, the inhibitory effect of merchant guild culture on the mission drift of SMFIs is stronger. This finding confirms the synergistic relationship of mutual promotion and joint efficiency between formal and informal institutions, and also illustrates the coupling effect of digital technology and traditional culture in optimizing the social performance of SMFIs. Our study provides theoretical support for policy recommendations such as transforming traditional culture into industry self-discipline norms and personal behavioral guidelines, improving the level of group financial literacy, and enhancing digital inclusive finance. The contributions of our study can be summarized as follows: First, it enriches the theory of small bank advantage, which is conducive to China's construction of a multi-tiered, broadly covered, and differentiated banking institution system to meet the structural and diversified financial service needs of the real economy. Second, from the perspective of excellent traditional Chinese culture, it extends the research perspective of mission drift, combining the special businesses of Chinese SMFIs such as loans to agriculture and small and micro enterprises, and studies their initial mission. These studies help us further understand the role of informal institutions in financial institutions and credit markets. Third, it broadens the research boundary of traditional culture values, revealing the positive role of merchant guild culture in inhibiting the mission drift in SMFIs from the perspective of the financial industry. Finally, it further explores the synergistic relationship between merchant guild culture as an informal institution and formal institutions such as the level of private sector development and government supervision, as well as the development of digital inclusive finance. Future research could further expand the research perspective to comprehensively assess the impact of merchant guild culture on various types of inclusive finance businesses, as well as the depth and breadth of poverty alleviation coverage.
[1]陈斌开和陈思宇, 2018,《流动的社会资本——传统宗族文化是否影响移民就业？》,《经济研究》第3期,第35～49页。 [2]曹远征和陈军, 2019,《微型金融:从“排斥”到“包容”》,人民出版社。 [3]傅衣凌, 2008,《明清社会经济史论文集》,中华书局。 [4]费孝通, 1998,《乡土中国生育制度》,北京大学出版社。 [5]冯晨、陈舒和白彩全, 2019,《长期人力资本积累的历史根源:制度差异、儒家文化传播与国家能力塑造》,《经济研究》第5期,第146～163页。 [6]郭峰、王靖一和王芳等, 2020, 《测度中国数字普惠金融发展:指数编制与空间特征》, 《经济学(季刊)》 第19卷第4期, 第1401～1418页。 [7]胡诗阳、尹亮和祝继高, 2023,《破产法庭设立、债权人保护与地方性商业银行风险》,《经济研究》第12期,第95～112页。 [8]蒋光明和陈慧荣, 2022,《非正式制度与国家治理:一项研究述评》,《实证社会科学》第1期,第143～159页。 [9]江艇,2022,《因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应》,《中国工业经济》第5期,第100～120页。 [10]刘冲、刘莉亚和李庆宸, 2021,《“排斥”还是“包容”:传统宗族文化与现代银行发展》,《经济研究》第4期,第110～125页。 [11]刘蓝予、周黎安和吴琦, 2021,《传统商业文化的长期经济影响——基于明清商帮的实证研究》,《管理世界》第11期,第106～120、128页。 [12]刘秋根和张丽, 2020,《商书所见清代晋商的商业教育理念——以〈劝号谱〉为中心》,《宁夏社会科学》第5期,第156～166页。 [13]宁博、潘越和汤潮, 2022,《地域商会有助于缓解企业融资约束吗？——来自A股民营上市企业的证据》,《金融研究》第2期,第153～170页。 [14]潘越、宁博和纪翔阁, 2019,《民营资本的宗族烙印:来自融资约束视角的证据》,《经济研究》第7期,第94～110页。 [15]王世华, 2018,《论明清徽商的职业教育》,《安徽师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》第1期,第1～12页。 [16]王小鲁、樊纲和余静文, 2017,《中国分省份市场化指数报告(2016)》,社会科学文献出版社。 [17]吴水金, 2001,《论明清粤商的商人精神》,《华南理工大学学报(社会科学版)》第3期,第78～80、59页。 [18]徐细雄和李万利, 2019,《儒家传统与企业创新:文化的力量》,《金融研究》第9期,第112～130页。 [19]袁志刚、郭学琦和葛劲峰, 2021,《中小企业融资与中小银行发展——由中国现实问题引发的理论与实证分析》,《上海经济研究》第3期,第70～83页。 [20]张博和范辰辰, 2018,《文化多样性与民间金融:基于方言视角的经验研究》,《金融研究》第7期,第69～89页。 [21]张海鹏和张海瀛, 1993,《中国十大商帮》,黄山书社。 [22]张海英, 2019,《走向大众的“计然之术”——明清时期的商书研究》,中华书局。 [23]张明、蓝海林、陈伟宏和曾萍, 2021,《本土宗教传统与公司避税——基于我国34100座寺院和8349座宫观的实证研究》,《经济学(季刊)》第4期,第1345～1368页。 [24]张号栋和尹志超, 2016,《金融知识和中国家庭的金融排斥——基于CHFS数据的实证研究》,《金融研究》第7期,第80～95页。 [25]张璇、李子健和李春涛, 2019,《银行业竞争、融资约束与企业创新——中国工业企业的经验证据》,《金融研究》第10期,第98～116页。 [26]张一林、林毅夫和龚强, 2019,《企业规模、银行规模与最优银行业结构——基于新结构经济学的视角》,《管理世界》第35卷第3期,第31～47,206页。 [27]赵家琪、江弘毅和胡诗云,2023,《数字普惠金融下的小微信贷与风险——基于银行数字化转型的视角》,《经济学(季刊)》第23卷第5期,第1686～1703页。 [28]周雪光, 2019,《论中国官僚体制中的非正式制度》,《清华社会科学》第1期,第7～42页。 [29]Adhikari, B.K. and A. Agrawal, 2016, “Religion, Gambling Attitudes and Corporate Innovation,” Journal of Corporate Finance, 37, pp. 229～248. [30]Bongomin G O C, Munene J C, Ntayi J M, et al., 2018, “Social Network: Testing the Predictive Power of Its Dimensions in Explaining Financial Inclusion of the Poor in Rural Uganda”, African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 9(3), pp.388～406. [31]Freixas, X. and J.C. Rochet, 2008, Microeconomics of Banking, 2nd Edition, MIT Press Books, 1. [32]Chmelíková, G., A. Krauss, and O. Dvouletý, 2019, “Performance of Microfinance Institutions in Europe—Does Social Capital Matter？” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 68, pp. 100670. [33]Copestake, J., S. Johnson, M. Cabello, R. Goodwin-Groen, R. Gravesteijn, J. Humberstone, M. Nino-Zarazua, and M. Titus, 2016, “Towards a Plural History of Microfinance,” Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue Canadienne d'études Du Développement, 37(3), pp. 279～297. [34]Cull, R., A. Demirgu¨ç‐Kunt, and J. Morduch, 2007, “Financial Performance and Outreach: A Global Analysis of Leading Microbanks,” The Economic Journal, 117(517), pp. F107～F133. [35]Du, X., J. Weng, Q. Zeng, Y. Chang, and K. Pei, 2017, “Culture, Marketization, and Owner-Manager Agency Costs: A Case of Merchant Guild Culture in China,” Journal of Business Ethics, 143, pp. 353～386. [36]Hermes, N. and M. Hudon, 2019, “Determinants of the Performance of Microfinance Institutions: A Systematic Review,” Contemporary Topics in Finance: A Collection of Literature Surveys, pp. 297～330. [37]Lusardi A, Mitchell O S, 2014, “The Economic Importance of Financial Literacy: Theory and Evidence”, Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), pp.5～44. [38]Li, L., E. Ucar, and A. Yavas, 2022, “Social Capital and Mortgage Delinquency,” The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 64(3), pp. 379～403. [39]Mersland, R. and R.Ø. Strøm, 2010, “Microfinance Mission Drift？”, World Development, 38(1), pp. 28～36. [40]Nunn N, Puga D, 2012, “Ruggedness: The Blessing of Bad Geography in Africa”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(1), pp.20～36. [41]Postelnicu, L. and N. Hermes, 2015, “Microfinance Performance and Informal Institutions: A Cross-Country Analysis,” Working Papers CEB, 15. [42]Xu, R., K.A. Frank, S.J. Maroulis, and P. Rosenberg, 2019, “Konfound: Command to Quantify Robustness of Causal Inferences,” The Stata Journal, 19(3), pp. 523～550.
