Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2311.01206

How Does China's Household Portfolio Selection Vary with Financial Inclusion?

Yong Bian·Xiqian Wang·Qin Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Portfolio underdiversification is one of the most costly losses accumulated over a household's life cycle. We provide new evidence on the impact of financial inclusion services on households' portfolio choice and investment efficiency using 2015, 2017, and 2019 survey data for Chinese households. We hypothesize that higher financial inclusion penetration encourages households to participate in the financial market, leading to better portfolio diversification and investment efficiency. The results of the baseline model are consistent with our proposed hypothesis that higher accessibility to financial inclusion encourages households to invest in risky assets and increases investment efficiency. We further estimate a dynamic double machine learning model to quantitatively investigate the non-linear causal effects and track the dynamic change of those effects over time. We observe that the marginal effect increases over time, and those effects are more pronounced among low-asset, less-educated households and those located in non-rural areas, except for investment efficiency for high-asset households.

Explore related subjects

econ.GNq-fin.EC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yong Bian, Xiqian Wang, Qin Zhang. 2023-11-02. How Does China's Household Portfolio Selection Vary with Financial Inclusion?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.01206

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The time interpretation of expected utility theory

Economic models often maximise expectation values of wealth or utility. In non-ergodic settings, these can differ from time-averages, so that maximising expected outcomes need not maximise – and can systematically reduce – long-run wealth or utility. Ergodicity economics highlights this problem and models individual agents as maximising wealth in the long run, known as growth optimality. Two instances where expected utility maximisation maps to growth optimality are known: linear utility does this for additive wealth dynamics; and logarithmic utility for multiplicative wealth dynamics. Here we show that the mapping holds more generally when the utility function coincides with the ergodicity transformation in the growth optimal model. This mapping offers a theoretical basis for choosing utility functions and suggests the testable hypothesis that wealth dynamics are predictive of risk preferences.

econ.GN↗
arXiv2026

Monetary Regimes and Trade before the Classical Gold Standard: Evidence from the Latin Monetary Union

This paper reexamines the trade effects of the Latin Monetary Union (LMU), a 19th century agreement to standardize gold and silver coinage among several European countries. The LMU provides a useful setting for studying whether monetary arrangements fostered trade before the classical gold standard, when gold, silver, bimetallic, and paper regimes coexisted. Because some countries already shared other monetary standards, treating all non-member pairs as a single control group mixes pairs with and without alternative forms of monetary coordination. I classify pairs by standard and estimate the LMU effect relative to pairs without a common standard, bringing the comparison closer to those used in the literature on the gold standard and contemporary currency unions. The results suggest that the LMU increased trade between its members by approximately 30\% during its early years, when bimetallism was still credible. These effects subsequently faded, converging to zero by the end of the 1870s. More broadly, these findings also highlight the importance of accounting for the existing monetary regimes when estimating the trade effects of other international policies.

econ.GN↗
arXiv2026

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN↗