| Literature DB >> 36037191 |
Fei Li1, Yufei Wu1, Jinli Liu2, Shen Zhong2.
Abstract
Industrial transformation (IT) is the inevitable course for the sustainable development of resource-based cities, while digital inclusive finance (DIF) provides essential capital elements for industrial transformation. Based on the panel data of 115 resource-based cities in China from 2011 to 2019, this paper discusses the influence mechanism of digital inclusive finance on industrial transformation from the perspectives of the optimization of industrial structure (OIS) and the rationalization of industrial structure (RIS). The empirical results show that digital inclusive finance has a positive effect on both the optimization of industrial structure and the rationalization of industrial structure. Digital inclusive finance influences industrial transformation through residents' income and technological innovation. In addition, in the analysis of income gap and innovation gap, low-income regions have a better effect on the industrial transformation of industrial structure optimization, while high-income regions have a better effect in manufacturing upgrading, thus resulting in a more significant effect of industrial transformation on the rationalization of industrial structure. Obviously, the development of high-innovation regions has relative advantages with more channels for industrial transformation, which have significant effect of industrial transformation. Therefore, it is necessary to provide differentiated reform on the basis of unified development reform.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36037191 PMCID: PMC9423615 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273680
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1Mechanism of the effect of digital inclusive finance on industrial transformation.
Digital inclusive financial indicator system.
| First-level dimension | Second-level dimension | Specific indictors | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage breadth | Account coverage rate | Number of Alipay accounts per 10,000 people | |
| Alipay card user ratio | |||
| Average number of bank cards per Alipay account bound | |||
| Usage depth | Payment transactions | Average number of bank cards per Alipay account bound | |
| Per capita payment amount | |||
| Number of active users with high frequency (50 times per year and above) Accounted for one times per year and above | |||
| Money fund business | Number of balances purchased per capita | ||
| Amount of balance treasure purchased per capita | |||
| Number of people who buy Yu ‘e Bao per 10,000 Alipay users | |||
| Credit operations | Personal consumption loan | Number of Internet consumer loans per 10,000 adult Alipay users | |
| number of loans per capita | |||
| Per capita loan amount | |||
| Small and micro operators | Number of Internet micro business loan users per ten thousand Alipay adult users | ||
| Number of loans per household of small and micro operators | |||
| Average loan amount for small and micro operators | |||
| Insurance business | Number of insured users per 10,000 Alipay users | ||
| Per capita insurance pens | |||
| Per capita insurance amount | |||
| Investment business | Number of Internet investors per million Alipay users | ||
| Number of investments per capita | |||
| Per capita investment amount | |||
| Credit business | Natural person credit per capita call times | ||
| Number of credit-based service users per 10,000 Alipay users (including finance, accommodation, travel, social networking, etc.) | |||
| Digitization level | Mobility | The proportion of mobile payment pens | |
| Proportion of mobile payments | |||
| Facilitation | Average loan interest rate of small and micro operators | ||
| Personal average loan interest rate | |||
| Credit-oriented | Proportion of Huabei payment pens | ||
| Payment ratio | |||
| Percentage of Sesame Credit Deposit Free Pens (total deposit requirement) | |||
| Proportion of Sesame Credit Free Deposits (total deposit requirement) | |||
| Facilitation | Proportion of pens paid by user 2D code | ||
| Proportion of amount paid by user 2D code | |||
Descriptive statistics of variables.
| Obs | Mean | Std | Min | Max | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OIS | 1035 | 3.629 | 0.247 | 2.317 | 4.321 |
| RIS | 1035 | 3.451 | 1.804 | -2.753 | 8.124 |
| DIF | 1035 | 4.954 | 0.520 | 3.060 | 5.650 |
| DR | 1035 | 7.490 | 0.637 | 5.857 | 13.720 |
| RO | 1035 | 4.185 | 1.639 | -4.613 | 7.895 |
| ED | 1035 | 10.247 | 0.545 | 8.734 | 12.261 |
| CI | 1035 | 2.326 | 0.053 | 2.167 | 2.506 |
| PD | 1035 | 5.401 | 0.941 | 2.270 | 6.946 |
Basic regression results.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIF | 0.251 | 0.224 | 0.240 | -0.564 | -0.468 | -0.456*** |
| DR | 0.039 | -0.003 | 0.013 | 0.109 | 0.037 | 0.033 |
| RO | 0.017 | 0.004 | 0.006 | -0.094 | -0.032 | -0.033* |
| ED | 0.053 | -0.835 | -0.549 | 4.166 | -2.691 | -1.960 |
| CI | -1.769 | 4.646 | 3.395 | -41.335 | 25.711 | 18.723 |
| PD | -0.013 | -0.128 | -0.017 | -0.195 | 0.642* | -0.120 |
| N | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 |
| R2 | 0.377 | 0.590 | 0.578 | 0.058 | 0.144 | 0.139 |
| F test | 12.85 | 74.06 | ||||
| LM test | 1147.16 | 3238.06*** | ||||
| Hausman test | 52.02 | 8.31 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Regression results of decomposition items.
| (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) | (11) | (12) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage_breadth | 0.200 | -0.416 | ||||
| Usage_depth | 0.225 | -0.402 | ||||
| Digitization_level | 0.153 | -0.364 | ||||
| DR | -0.006 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.040 | 0.018 | 0.022 |
| RO | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.002 | -0.032* | -0.028 | -0.030 |
| ED | -0.870 | -1.022 | -0.864 | -2.049 | -1.854 | -2.450 |
| CI | 4.302 | 7.179 | 4.354 | 20.776 | 16.850 | 23.971 |
| PD | 0.129 | -0.093 | -0.091 | -0.103 | 0.533 | -0.118 |
| N | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 |
| R2 | 0.574 | 0.599 | 0.490 | 0.136 | 0.110 | 0.128 |
| F test | 12.46 | 13.43 | 10.79 | 69.64 | ||
| LM test | 1052.86 | 1250.66 | 872.11 | 3252.25 | 3133.94 | 3251.91 |
| Hausman test | 75.93 | 37.94 | 83.22 | 8.55 | 11.81 | 7.98 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Stability test results.
| (13) | (14) | (15) | (16) | (17) | (18) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIF | 0.049 | 0.048 | 0.047 | |||
| Coverage_breadth | 0.041 | |||||
| Usage_depth | 0.055 | |||||
| Digitization_level | 0.030 | |||||
| DR | -0.016 | 0.020 | 0.015 | 0.020 | 0.021 | 0.022 |
| RO | -0.016 | -0.013 | -0.014 | -0.013 | -0.013 | -0.014 |
| ED | 0.484 | -1.497 | -1.065 | -1.522 | -1.496 | -1.532 |
| CI | -7.500 | 13.717 | 8.971 | 13.800 | 13.935 | 13.912 |
| PD | -0.044 | 0.040 | -0.044 | 0.041 | 0.0439 | 0.050 |
| N | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 |
| R2 | 0.324 | 0.212 | 0.209 | 0.206 | 0.224 | 0.195 |
| F test | 26.83 | 26.65 | 27.26 | 26.22 | ||
| LM test | 2198.57 | 2190.95 | 2210.86 | 2174.18 | ||
| Hausman test | 13.13 | 12.51 | 15.26 | 12.01 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Estimation results of instrumental variable method.
| (19) | (20) | |
|---|---|---|
| DIF | 0.280 | -0.610 |
| DR | -0.008(-0.80) | 0.050(1.11) |
| RO | 0.006(1.30) | -0.036 |
| ED | -0.425(-0.81) | -3.731(-1.59) |
| CI | 1.113(0.21) | 34.679(1.44) |
| PD | -0.165 | 0.739 |
| N | 1035 | 1035 |
| R2 | 0.572 | 0.132 |
| First stage IV | 0.076 | 0.076 |
| Contral variable | Yes | Yes |
| F test | 11.94 | 72.83 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Estimated results of mediating variable method.
| OIS | RIS | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patent | OIS | Wage | OIS | Patent | RIS | Wage | RIS | |
| Patent | 0.055 | -0.072 | ||||||
| Wage | 0.380 | -0.290 | ||||||
| DIF | 0.822 | 0.179 | 0.424 | 0.063 | 0.856 | -0.395 | 0.432 | -0.333 |
| Contral | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | Yes |
| R2 | 0.451 | 0.609 | 0.794 | 0.642 | 0.448 | 0.140 | 0.790 | 0.143 |
| N | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 | 1035 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Income level heterogeneity.
| (21) | (22) | (23) | (24) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIF | 0.235 | 0.210 | -0.419 | -0.508 |
| DR | -0.004(-0.36) | -0.010(-0.59) | 0.058(1.05) | -0.005(-0.06) |
| RO | 0.001(0.10) | 0.001(1.50) | -0.056 | -0.012(-0.43) |
| ED | -1.598(-1.52) | -0.730(-1.14) | 1.860(0.41) | -1.098(-0.38) |
| CI | 12.511(1.19) | 3.456(0.51) | -16.643(-0.37) | 6.932(0.23) |
| PD | -0.517 | -0.055(-0.66) | -0.474 | 0.059(0.30) |
| R2 | 0.588 | 0.602 | 0.137 | 0.160 |
| Contral | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| N | 513 | 522 | 513 | 522 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.
Heterogeneity of innovation level.
| (25) | (26) | (27) | (28) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIF | 0.218 | 0.227 | -0.428 | -0.485 |
| DR | 0.001(0.03) | -0.029(-1.59) | -0.008(-0.14) | 0.219 |
| RO | -0.003(-0.47) | 0.017 | -0.032(-1.18) | -0.035(-1.29) |
| ED | -0.202(-0.29) | -2.018 | 3.087(0.95) | -6.152 |
| CI | -1.868(-0.27) | 17.776 | -30.586(-0.92) | 61.802 |
| PD | -0.751 | 0.067(0.76) | -0.146(-0.63) | 0.264(-1.73) |
| R2 | 0.628 | 0.581 | 0.126 | 0.194 |
| Contral | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| N | 513 | 522 | 513 | 522 |
Notes
* p<0.1
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01 the bracket represents the t value.