What Drives Inequality of Brazilian Cross-State Household Credit?*

MATOS, PAULO; CORREIA, JOAQUIM

doi:10.5935/0034-7140.20170016

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Economia

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Articles • Rev. Bras. Econ. 71 (3) • Jul-Sep 2017 • https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7140.20170016 copy

What Drives Inequality of Brazilian Cross-State Household Credit?^* 1 Concerning the role of financial intermediation on poverty, development and income inequality, we can mention some recent World Bank's contributions, as Ravallion (2001) and Beck et al. (2006).

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

According to Matos et al. (2013)Matos, P., Vasconcelos, J., & Penna, C. (2013). Política creditícia no Brasil: o sertão vai virar mar? Economia (Anpec), 14:1-129 credit policy in Brazil has been discriminatory and strongly characterized by a regional bias. We address this issue by aiming to identify Brazilian cross-state credit drivers. Methodologically we follow Matos (2017)Matos, P. R. F. (2017). On the Latin American Credit Drivers. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 53(2):306-320. by proposing a panel model to estimate relationships between real per capita Brazilian household credit and a set of relevant social, economic and financial variables. Our main findings considering all federal subnational entities during the period from 2004 to 2013 suggest that demand for credit plays a more relevant role than the supply thereof. Our evidence may be useful in writing theoretical models dealing with credit patterns in Brazil.

Keywords:
Household credit; Panel data; Poverty; Per capita income; Gini index; Years of schooling

	Endogenous variable		Supply side			Demand side
	Household real per capit aloan volume (R$ dec/2013)	Household loan delinquency rate (%)	Number of Bank Branches per 100,000 habitants	Real per capita bank deposit (R$ dec/2013)	Gini inequality index	Years of schooling	Unemployment rate as a percent of total labor force (%)	Poverty (%)	Household rea lper capita income (R$ dec/2013)
	Source: Central Bank of Brazil	Source: Central Bank of Brazil	Source: Central Bank of Brazil	Source: Central Bank of Brazil	Source: IPEADATA	Source: IPEADATA	Source: IPEADATA	Source: IPEADATA	Source: IPEADATA
Northeast region
Alagoas	1,739.21	6.812	4.565	532.02	0.564	4.939	10.565	39.898	5,643.36
Bahia	1,779.73	7.282	5.874	865.93	0.554	5.691	10.585	32.596	6,783.93
Ceará	1,515.86	6.925	4.755	1,786.78	0.547	5.667	7.666	33.149	6,265.49
Maranhão	1,442.51	7.966	4.056	325.07	0.560	5.261	7.990	40.596	5,433.31
Paraíba	1,887.03	5.849	5.180	519.05	0.566	5.528	9.124	33.051	6,953.80
Pernambuco	1,809.52	7.671	5.862	1,089.94	0.555	6.059	11.330	35.062	6,670.69
Piauí	1,479.59	7.122	4.138	302.23	0.563	5.054	5.945	36.406	6,345.89
Rio Grande do Norte	2,206.08	5.880	5.179	759.77	0.559	6.014	10.199	29.580	7,577.43
Sergipe	2,194.71	5.963	8.373	1,306.01	0.556	6.135	10.266	29.462	7,492.07
North region
Acre	2,201.63	5.029	5.791	690.54	0.572	6.254	8.217	30.164	7,740.09
Amapá	2,815.85	6.033	5.104	402.96	0.515	7.686	12.861	26.056	7,725.02
Amazonas	1,677.00	6.752	4.716	801.90	0.529	7.230	10.757	28.591	7,095.44
Pará	1,434.96	6.117	4.500	566.40	0.516	6.126	8.961	30.110	6,520.81
Rondônia	2,729.49	4.809	6.655	825.90	0.511	5.193	6.930	20.345	8,893.13
Roraima	2,751.49	7.032	5.270	660.77	0.541	7.318	10.382	27.293	8,083.83
Tocantins	2,656.44	5.269	6.123	526.20	0.533	6.340	6.899	25.023	7,971.95
Midwest region
Distrito Federal	7,993.85	4.632	13.277	22,260.47	0.605	9.462	10.795	10.660	21,521.44
Goiás	4,558.85	4.942	10.329	955.69	0.510	6.938	7.105	10.043	10,699.47
Mato Grosso	6,593.70	4.821	9.988	1,175.50	0.515	6.810	6.967	10.789	10,661.08
Mato Grosso do Sul	5,157.57	3.718	9.242	995.21	0.523	6.964	6.542	9.729	11,351.56
Southest region
Espírito Santo	3,202.58	4.495	10.848	2,341.72	0.523	7.153	7.869	10.272	10,755.52
Minas Gerais	3,080.62	4.496	9.864	1,951.89	0.514	6.768	7.707	10.438	10,347.20
Rio de Janeiro	3,522.25	6.568	11.384	3,928.09	0.543	8.223	9.684	11.653	13,780.25
São Paulo	4,515.72	4.921	15.059	8,501.05	0.505	8.121	8.880	9.092	14,176.02
South region
Paraná	4,619.82	3.860	12.756	4,084.51	0.504	7.346	5.906	10.582	12,524.44
Rio Grande do Sul	4,757.91	3.590	14.046	3,170.53	0.500	7.326	6.070	10.703	13,052.96
Santa Catarina	4,770.15	3.736	14.347	2,052.12	0.452	7.610	4.046	5.660	13,884.43

	Unrestriced model	Restricted models		Better specified model
	Unrestriced model	Supply side	Demand side	Better specified model
Constant	-5.132e-03^* * Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 5% level. [0.036]	1.212e-05^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.001]	-1.318e-05^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]	-4.777e-04^* * Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 5% level. [0.030]
Supply side
Household loan delinquency rate	0.777 [0.975]	-45.671 [0.514]
Number of Bank Branches per 100,000 adults	108.861 [0.058]	413.565^* * Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 5% level. [0.026]
Real per capita bank deposit	0.116 [0.259]	[0.000]	0.657^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level.
Gini inequality index	-1.573e-04^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]	-2.540e-05^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]		-1.633e-05^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]
Demand side
Years of schooling	803.728^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.006]		1.064 e-03^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]	866.906^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.003]
Unemployment rate as a percent of total labor force	6.142 [0.844]		-18.195 [0.581]
Poverty	86.883^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]		54.496^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]	90.995^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]
Household real per capita income	0.862^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]		0.860^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]	0.931^ Indicates the rejection of individually insignificant parameter hypothesis at 1% level. [0.000]
Complementary results
Adjusted R²	95.646%	79.622%	93.765%	95.324%
F -statistic	174.819 [0.000]	36.034 [0.000]	135.852 [0.000]	183.772 [0.000]
Hausmant test	144.035 [0.000]	66.899 [0.000]	139.417 [0.000]	144.900 [0.000]

Fundação Getúlio Vargas Praia de Botafogo, 190 11º andar, 22253-900 Rio de Janeiro RJ Brazil, Tel.: +55 21 3799-5831 , Fax: +55 21 2553-8821 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: rbe@fgv.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN1] Note:

[TFN2] ^a
Levin et al. (2002) panel unit common root test with intercept, over the period from 2004 to 2013.

[TFN3] ^b
Respective p-values are reported in the box brackets.Indicates the rejection of nonstationary hypothesis at 5% level.

[TFN4] *Indicates the rejection of nonstationary hypothesis at 1% level.

Supply side
Household loan delinquency rate	Number of Bank Branches per 100,000 adults	Real per capita bank deposit	Gini inequality index
-13.0776**	1.2576	-0.4136	-19.6156**
[0.0000]	[0.8957]	[0.3396]	[0.0000]
Demand side
Years of schooling	Unemployment rate as a percent of total labor force	Poverty	Household real per capita income
-6.7488**	-3.8082**	-8.5309**	-9.6995**
[0.0000]	[0.0001]	[0.0000]	[0.0000]
Endogenous
Household real per capita loan volume
-2.5147**
[0.0060]

Brasil

Brasil

What Drives Inequality of Brazilian Cross-State Household Credit?* 1 Concerning the role of financial intermediation on poverty, development and income inequality, we can mention some recent World Bank's contributions, as Ravallion (2001) and Beck et al. (2006).

What Drives Inequality of Brazilian Cross-State Household Credit?^* 1 Concerning the role of financial intermediation on poverty, development and income inequality, we can mention some recent World Bank's contributions, as Ravallion (2001) and Beck et al. (2006).