We describe a tractable general equilibrium environment in which producers can transform cash-flows at a cost to create securities that cater to the needs of heterogeneous investors. We use the resulting model to characterize the theoretical implications of reductions in the cost of cash-flow transformation activities. Those reductions result in a greater volume of cash-flow transformation but have ambiguous effects on capital formation, output, and TFP, in clear contrast to the outcome of traditional financial development exercises.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rajan and Zingales (1998) use industry-level data to provide more evidence that causation runs, at least in part, from financial development to economic development.
In Aghion et al. (2005), for instance, agency problems limit innovators’ access to finance which dampens long-term growth. Banerjee and Newman (1993), Galor and Zeira (1993), Aghion (1997), and Piketty (1997) argue that similar agency problems can cause poverty traps. Quantitatively, Amaral and Quintin (2010) argue that this type of frictions alone could account for much of the development gap between the USA and middle-income nations such as Mexico or Argentina. Midrigan and Xu (2014) find that these frictions have a lower impact once agents are given more time to self-finance to mitigate the impact of the borrowing constraints they face, but Moll (2014) argues that the mitigating effects of self-financing depend critically on the nature of the idiosyncratic shocks producers face. For similar exercises, see, e.g., Erosa (2001), Jeong and Townsend (2007), Erosa and Cabrillana (2008), Quintin (2008a, b), Buera et al. (2011), Buera and Shin (2013), Caselli and Gennaioli (2013). Papers that study the finance–development nexus qualitatively include Greenwood and Jovanovic (1990), Bencivenga and Smith (1991), Kahn (2001) and Amaral and Quintin (2006). Hopenhayn (2014) provides a detailed review of the literature on finance and misallocation.
For a review of the extensive literature on optimal security design see, e.g., Schmedders (2001).
One can embed this two-date economy into a two-period overlapping generation model in which households supply labor when young and invest their wealth when old. In the resulting economy, investor wealth depends on wages in the previous period. See Sect. 5 for a more detailed discussion of the resulting environment.
One area of finance where physical proximity is particularly valuable is Venture Capital which is organized around geographical hubs.
Otherwise, profits are bounded above unless demand for labor diverges to infinity (profits are linear in the wage bill) along a subsequence. If labor demand diverges, wages must converge to zero in at least one state.
This two-stage view of financial development has a counterpart in the model of Acemoglu et al. (2006) in which, in a nutshell, economic development consists first of harvesting low-hanging fruits but becomes tougher to sustain once obvious growth opportunities have been implemented.
Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., Zilibotti, F.: Distance to frontier, selection, and economic growth. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 4, 37–74 (2006)
Aghion, P., Bolton, P.: A theory of trickle-down growth and development. Rev. Econ. Stud. 64, 151–172 (1997)
Aghion, P., Howitt, P., Mayer-Foulkes, D.: The effect of financial development on convergence: theory and evidence. Q. J. Econ. 120, 173–222 (2005)
Allen, F., Gale, D.: Optimal security design. Rev. Financ. Stud. 1, 229–263 (1988)
Amaral, P.S., Quintin, E.: A competitive model of the informal sector. J. Monet. Econ. 53, 1541–1553 (2006)
Amaral, P.S., Quintin, E.: Limited enforcement, financial intermediation, and economic development: a quantitative assessment. Int. Econ. Rev. 51, 785–811 (2010)
Banerjee, A.V., Newman, A.F.: Occupational choice and the process of development. J. Polit. Econ. 101, 274–298 (1993)
Bencivenga, V.R., Smith, B.D.: Financial intermediation and endogenous growth. Rev. Econ. Stud. 58, 195–209 (1991)
Bernanke, B.S., Bertaut, C.C., DeMarco, L.P., Kamin, S.B.: International capital flows and the returns to safe assets in the United States, 2003–2007. In: International Finance Discussion Papers 1014, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.) (2011)
Buera, F.J., Shin, Y.: Financial frictions and the persistence of history: a quantitative exploration. J. Polit. Econ. 121, 221–272 (2013)
Buera, F.J., Kaboski, J.P., Shin, Y.: Finance and development: a tale of two sectors. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 1964–2002 (2011)
Caselli, F., Gennaioli, N.: Dynastic management. Econ. Inq. 51, 971–996 (2013)
Erosa, A.: Financial intermediation and occupational choice in development. Rev. Econ. Dyn. 4, 303–334 (2001)
Erosa, A., Cabrillana, A.H.: On finance as a theory Of TFP, cross-industry productivity differences, and economic rents. Int. Econ. Rev. 49, 437–473 (2008)
Galor, O., Zeira, J.: Income distribution and macroeconomics. Rev. Econ. Stud. 60, 35–52 (1993)
Goldsmith, R.: Financial Structure and Development. Yale University Press, New Haven (1969)
Greenwood, J., Jovanovic, B.: Financial development, growth, and the distribution of income. J. Polit. Econ. 98, 1076–1107 (1990)
Greenwood, R., Scharfstein, D.: The growth of finance. J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 3–28 (2013)
Halket, J.: Existence of an Equilibrium in Incomplete Markets with Discrete Choices and Many Markets. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Essex (2014)
Hopenhayn, H.A.: Firms, misallocation, and aggregate productivity: a review. Annu. Rev. Econ. 6, 735–770 (2014)
Jeong, H., Townsend, R.: Sources of TFP growth: occupational choice and financial deepening. Econ. Theory 32, 179–221 (2007)
Khan, A.: Financial development and economic growth. Macroecon. Dyn. 5, 413–433 (2001)
King, R., Levine, R.: Finance and growth: Schumpeter might be right. Q. J. Econ. 108, 717–737 (1993)
McKinnon, R.: Money and Capital in Economic Development. The Brookings Institution, Washington (1973)
Midrigan, V., Xu, D.Y.: Finance and misallocation: evidence from plant-level data. Am. Econ. Rev. 104, 422–458 (2014)
Moll, B.: Productivity losses from financial frictions: can delf-financing undo capital misallocation? Am. Econ. Rev. 104, 3186–3221 (2014)
Piketty, T.: The dynamics of the wealth distribution and the interest rate with credit rationing. Rev. Econ. Stud. 64, 173–189 (1997)
Quintin, E.: Limited enforcement and the organization of production. J. Macroecon. 30, 1222–1245 (2008a)
Quintin, E.: Contract enforcement and the size of the informal economy. Econ. Theory 37, 395–416 (2008b)
Rajan, R., Zingales, L.: Financial dependence and growth. Am. Econ. Rev. 88, 559–586 (1998)
Schmedders, K.: Monopolistic security design in finance economies. Econ. Theory 18, 37–72 (2001)
Shaw, E.: Financial Deepening in Economic Development. Oxford University Press, New York (1973)
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
We thank Grace Li, Roozbeh Hosseini, Vincenzo Quadrini, Robert Townsend, André Silva, Gianluca Violante, and seminar participants and attendees at the California Macroeconomics Conference, the Midwest Macro Meetings, the Society for Economic Dynamics meetings, the Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory meetings, the North-American and European and Latin American Econometric Society meetings, the Portuguese Economic Journal Meetings, the University of Georgia, the University of California Riverside, Banco de Portugal, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta for their generous comments.
About this article
Cite this article
Amaral, P.S., Quintin, E. Security creation costs and economic development. Econ Theory 71, 283–304 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-020-01245-5
- Endogenous security markets
- Financial engineering
- Macroeconomic aggregates