The degree to which bankruptcy is permitted to play a role in the allocation of capital is a key distinction between the Asian state-directed financial regime and the Western market-directed version. The paper discusses the two approaches to finance and argues that a major problem with the bank finance model used in many Asian countries is its minimization of bankruptcy risks. A three-sector development model (agriculture, manufacturing, and financial sector) is developed and simulated to compare the outcomes of the two approaches separately and then to evaluate the transition costs of switching from a state- to a market-directed financial regime. The simulation results suggest that the market approach results in a higher long-run growth path because it eliminates inefficient firms through bankruptcy. The results also suggest that switching from a state- to a market-directed model can be very costly to the economy, though the transition costs can be lowered somewhat by a delayed and phased-in liberalization. At the same time, a delayed and phased-in approach may induce other difficulties not considered in the model. Several policy implications are drawn from the model and simulation results; for example, development of an infrastructure to provide for orderly bankruptcy and the development of money and capital markets should be given high priority in the liberalization process.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: