消费信贷的决定因素【外文翻译】

外文翻译
原文
The Determinants of Consumer Credit Material Source: Source: Consumer Credit in Europe—Risks and opportunities of a Damnic Industryy
Author:Daniela Vandone
1 Introduction
The literature of consumer credit is sizeable. Such a body of work reflects not only the composite nature of unsecured debt, but also the fact that different methodological approaches exist depending on the research questions under analysis and the objectives sought.
Four main approaches can be seen: a management approach, which focuses on the characteristics of the credit industry, its workings and the policies adopted by supply-side players; a legal approach, which investigates the impact the regulatory framework has on competition and consumer protection; a socio-psychological approach, which analyses how individuals are affected by consumption behavior and indebtedness choices; an economic approach, which for the most part concentrates on the determinants of the demand for and supply of consumer credit and on an analysis of the characteristics of individuals and households in debt.
In this chapter we will discuss the economic approach with the aim of providing an outline of the individual and institutional factors that are considered in the literature as determinants of consumer credit, its diffusion and distribution amongst different segments of the population.
The economic models referred to are based on the economic rationality of individuals, who seek to increase living standards by smoothing consumption over different periods of their lives through saving and borrowing decisions. According to these models, consumer credit demand and supply is determined by individual factors, i.e. socio-demographic and economic factors, as well as by institutional factors, i.e. the institutional context in which borrowers and lenders are placed.
These studies, which first appeared in the second half of the twentieth century, have been flanked in recent years by work in behavioral economics, which focuses
instead on th e psychological variables that influence an individual’s behavior and which have revealed that this behavior is at odds with the rational choices posited by traditional economic models.
The analysis of the literature offered here, rather than attempting to represent an exhaustive summary of empirical estimations and economic models used by the authors of the various works cited, more modestly aims to provide a basis for specific investigations into the diffusion of consumer credit in Europe, the nature of the consumer credit industry, the causes of over-indebtedness and the most appropriate policy responses to the problem.
2 The Life-Cycle and Permanent Income Theories
The theoretical economic framework for consumption, saving and indebtedness decisions developed within the Life-Cycle theory, developed by Modigliani and Brumberg 1954, and the Permanent Income Hypothesis, proposed by Friedman in 1957.（1）
The central idea of these inter-temporal consumption choice models is that households make their consumption choices (and consequently those relating to saving and indebtedness) on the basis of their wealth, current disposable income and future income expectations so as to guarantee a uniform level of consumption over their lifetimes.
The underlying assumption of these models is that income is generally low in an individual’s early working life and tends to rise towards retirement. Individuals at the start of their working life, expecting higher future income receipts, finance the purchase of assets in order to raise consumption over the level offered by current income. Nearing the end of their working lives, inversely, individuals raise savings levels in preparation for retirement when spending will be greater than earnings. Within this framework, saving and indebtedness guarantee heightened economic welfare by smoothing out consumption over time.
In the ‘‘standard theory’’, named as such by Modigliani himself, the economic model posits that choices regarding households’ consumption levels over different periods of their life are subject to an inter-temporal budget constraint. Consequently, they may decide in a certain year to spend more than available income by running down all or part of their assets and/or by borrowing, provided that such a solution is temporary and that they die solvent.（2）
Considerable further empirical analyses of the theory have stressed the need for the standard model to take into account two additional aspects (Ando and
Modigliani 1957; Modigliani et al. 1985; Modigliani 1988; Deaton 1992; Alessie et al. 1997; Attanasio 1999):
–Households demand for debt is subject to factors other than income and wealth;
–House holds may be ‘‘liquidity constrained’’.
Encompassing these aspects effectively implies the model should address variables that influence both the demand and supply sides of the credit market (Table 1.1). These variables can be either ‘‘individual’’ or ‘‘institutional’’. Individual factors regard the characteristics of an individual and his/her household and can be classified into two classes: socio-demographic (for example, age, size and composition of the family, education) and economic (for example, employment status, work profiles, financial assets).
Institutional factors that characterize local credit markets include the justice system, the existence and quality of information-sharing mechanisms amongst
financial institutions, and the presence of informal credit circuits (borrowing from relatives and friends).
The same variables, individual and institutional, influence both credit demand and supply, albeit not always to the same extent and in the same direction.（3）
3 Empirical Findings
Empirical analyses aimed at studying the determinants of household credit markets and their coherence with Life-Cycle and Permanent Income models focus on the following areas, according to the research questions they investigate: – Participation in the credit market
– Level of borrowing
– Cross-country characteristics
– Risk of over-indebtedness
– Credit constraints
Work across these areas examines both individual and institutional variables. Analysis has typically concentrated on the demand side, though a branch of study has used economic
4 Behavioral Economics
Behavioral economics has in recent years proposed alternative theories to Life- Cycle and Permanent Income models (Brown et al. 2005; Karlsson et al. 2004; Ranyard et al. 2006; Stone and Vasquez Maury 2006; Supriya et al. 2005; Poppe 2008; Yang et al. 2007; Graham and Isaac 2002). These studies have focused on behavioral aspects that may significantly influence individuals’ decisions relating to spending, saving or indebtedness. These aspects differ from the socio-demographic and economic variables analyzed within the economic models discussed in the previous paragraphs.
The research models adopted within behavioral economics are based on empirical results and anomalies regarding consumer behavior that conflict with traditional notions of economic rationality. Several studies have in fact shown how the behavior of individuals deviates systematically from the ‘‘rational choice’’ model of standard economic theories without implying that such behavior is irrational.（8）
Individual choices are influenced by psychological factors, such as personal
taste, forecasting errors and impatience, which as a result prevent individuals from maximizing future utility (Kilborn 2005; Meier and Sprenger 2007).
Three main psychological factors are identified in the literature as inducing individuals to make non rational borrowing choices:
– Overconfidence bias
– Availability heuristic
—Hyperbolic discounting
Studies carried out within behavioral economics have also shown that individuals have little awareness of the existence and consequences these psychological mechanisms have. Indeed, individuals in financial difficulties tend to lay the blame on exogenous factors such as illness, divorce or job loss, which reduce incomes levels below those expected. Rarely do individuals recognize that the causes for their difficulties lie principally or at least also with their inability to manage money and the decisions made regarding spending and indebtedness. Furthermore, many studies have shown how deviant behavior patterns persist even when individuals are aware of the risks they face. Individuals’ incapacity to take corrective steps despite knowing of the dangers of over-indebtedness may have significant repercussion designing effective policies for the management of situations of indebtedness that are already or are at risk of becoming pathological9 (Kilborn 2005; Watson 2003; Lea et al. 1995).
5 Summary of the Determinants of the Demand for and Supply of Consumer Credit
The economic models of the Permanent Income and Life-Cycle theories continue to be used as a framework for analysis of households’ consumption, saving and indebtedness decisions (Jappelli 2005).
However, work in behavioral economics has made an important contribution in drawing attention to the role played not only by socio-demographic and economic variables, but also psychological factors as determinants of the demand for unsecured debt. It has also been shown how psychological factors have an impact on the effectiveness of policies adopted to prevent ex ante and manage ex post financial difficulties arising from over-indebtedness.
Table 1.3 provides a summary of the factors influencing the demand for and supply of consumer credit. As can be seen, the signs (+) and (—) are not always
homogeneous and have varying degrees of intensity.(10)
These factors will be discussed in the chapters that follow and, in particular, during an analysis of the diffusion of consumer credit in Europe, the characteristics of individuals in debt, the most appropriate policies for the prevention and management of over-indebtedness and the lending policies adopted by the credit industry.
译文
消费信贷的决定因素
资料来源:在欧洲的消费信贷——一个风险与机遇并存的活力产业
作者：丹妮拉▪凡邓
1 简介
有关消费信贷的文献所述内容范围是可观的。

就像作品的主体，反映的不仅仅是无担保债务的综合性质，也包括了在研究中分析问题和目标时，所使用的不同的方式方法。

其中，四种主要方法分别是：其一，管理办法。

它针对信用行业的特点，运作以及被供应方所采用的贸易政策展开；其二，法律办法。

这种办法通过调查有关保护竞争和消费者的规管架构的影响开展；其三，社会心理办法。

它主要研究消费行为和债务的选择如何影响个人；其四，经济办法。

它大部分关注于对消费者的需求和信贷供给的决定因素，和对关于个人和家庭债务特点的分析。

在这一章中，我们将讨论经济方法，其中包括提供个人和机构因素方针的目的。

本文将这些因素作为消费信贷的决定因素，其中包括其不同地区人口的扩散和分布。

该经济模式是在个人的经济合理性的基础上所建立的，所谓个人的经济合理性就是人们利用平滑消费提高生活标准，而平滑消费则是人们在生活不同时期利用消费储蓄和借款决策实现的。

根据这些模型，消费信贷需求和供给通过个别因素（即社会人口和经济因素），以及机制上的因素（即体制环境中，借款人和贷款人的位置）决定的。

这些研究，首先在二十世纪下半叶出现，近年来主要运用于研究行为经济学，它关注的重点不再只是一个人的行为因素的影响。

该研究的结果显示，这
种行为与传统经济模型假定的理性选择不同。

该文献的分析在这里所提供的内容，不是为了代表一种实证估计和各种文献作者引用的经济模式的全面概述，更准确的说是为了对在欧洲消费信贷扩散的具体调查，提供一个基础理论，这个基础是消费信贷行业的本质，过度负债的原因，也是针对问题所提出的最合理的方针。

2 生命周期理论和永久收入
关于消费的理论经济框架，即在生命周期理论中发展的储蓄和债务结论，通过莫迪利亚尼和布伦伯格在1954年发展起来。

另一方面，永久收入假说，由弗里德曼在1957年提出。

这些跨期消费选择模型的中心思想是指家庭，基于他们的财富基础，当前可支配收入，以及以保证在其一生中的消费水平一致的未来收入预期，做出了他们的消费选择（这些选择涉及储蓄与消费）。

这些模型的基本假设是，在一个人早期的生活工作中，收入普遍较低，然后逐渐呈上升趋势，直到其退休。

每个人在其生活工作的开始，都预期拥有未来更高的收入，而金融资产购买协议是为了提高按目前收入的消费水平。

相反地，当人们的工作生活即将结束时，支出将比高于收入，人们为了退休做准备将提高储蓄水平。

在这一框架内，随着时间的消费平滑，储蓄和债务保证提高了经济福利。

在''标准理论'中，这个经济模型由莫迪利亚尼自己命名，该模型认为消费选择和不同时期的家庭生活消费水平相关，受跨期预算约束。

因此，他们可以决定某一年花费比可支配收入多，这种决定是根据自己的全部或部分资产，和/或者通过可偿付借款这样一种暂时的解决方式。

大量的进一步理论实证分析强调了标准模型需要考虑到另外两个方面（安藤和莫迪利安尼1957；莫迪里阿尼等1985年；莫迪里阿尼1988年；德亚顿1992年；艾丽西斯；等1997年；安唐纳西奥1999）：居民家庭债务需求除了收入和财富以为还受其他因素影响；家庭可能是“流动性约束”。

表格1.1消费信贷需求和供给因素
围绕这些方面有效地暗示了该模型研究了变量对于信贷市场的需求和供给两方面的影响（表1.1）。

这些变量可以是“个人”或“机构”。

个人因素重视个人和他/她的家庭的特点，这些因素可分为两大类：社会人口（例如年龄，家庭的大小和组成，教育）和经济（例如就业状况，工作概况，金融资产）。

机构因素是当地信贷市场的特点，其中包括司法系统的存在和金融机构之间的信息共享机制的质量，以及非正规信贷渠道的存在（从亲戚和朋友借贷）。

相同的变量，个人和机构，同时影响信贷需求和供给，尽管影响的程度和方式不相同。

（3）
3 实证结果
实证分析旨在在学习家庭信贷市场的决定因素，和生命周期和持久收入模型的结合。

该实证分析根据他们调查研究的问题，着重研究了以下几个方面：信贷市场的参与；借贷水平；全国性特征；过度负债风险；信贷约束。

在这些领域的工作检验了个人和机构的变量。

分析通常集中在需求方面，尽管研究的分支已经用于经济。

4 行为经济学
近几年来，行为经济学对于生命周期和持久收入模型提出了替代理论（（布朗等人，2005年；卡尔森等人2004；朗雅德等人2006年；斯通和瓦斯克斯•保持莫里2006；苏博瑞等人，2005年；波佩2008年，杨等人2007；格雷厄姆和艾萨克2002）。

这些研究侧重研究于行为方面，而这些行为可能显著地影响个人的决策与消费，储蓄或负债。

这些方面与之前段落中讨论的经济模型所分析的社会认可和经济变数有所不同。

采用行为经济学的研究模型是基于实证结果和有关传统经济合理性概念的消费者行为冲突。

一些研究表明了个人的行为如何系统地偏离标准的经济理论模型“理性选择”，但这并不意味着这种行为的是不合理的。

个人的选择受心理因素的影响，如个人品味，预报误差和缺乏耐心。

个人选择可以防止个人未来效用最大化的结果（基尔2005；迈耶和斯普伦杰2007年）。

三个主要心理因素在文献中被定义，其中包括个人做出的非理性的借款选择：过度自信偏差；可用性启发式；双曲线贴现。

在行为经济学中的研究也证明了，个人没有存在的意识和心理机制造成的结果。

事实上，个人在财政困难时，总是倾向于将原因归咎于外在因素，比如疾病，离婚或失去工作，这些原因将减少他们的收入水平，低于了他们预期的收入。

很少有人意识到引起他们财政困难的主要原因，或者说他们对理财的不合理性以及作出的关于支出和借贷的决定。

此外，许多研究表明如何坚持越轨行为模式，甚至当他们已经清醒的意识到自己面临着风险。

尽管人们知道了过度负债的危险，却还是缺乏改变财政困难的能力。

这种能力的缺乏，对于在负债情况下的管理，设计出有效政策有着重大的影响。

这种负债情形的情况是变成病理19（基尔2005年；沃森2003；利等人1995年）的一个危险状况
5 需求影响因素的概要和消费信贷的供应
常设收入和生命周期理论的经济模式仍旧继续作为一个用来分析家庭的消费，储蓄和债务的决定框架来使用(Jappelli 2005)。

但是，在行为经济学的研究中已经做出了一个非常重要的贡献，它所起到的作用不仅仅是受社会人口和经济变量的影响，也是受心理因素的影响，并且这个心理因素在无担保债务的需求中起到了决定的作用。

心理因素是如何影响事前预防事后管理财政危机从而防止过度负债造成的财政困难的政策的有效性已经被证明。

表三提供了影响消费者的需求和信贷供给因素的内容。

正如我们所见，符号（+）、（—）总是不均匀的，并且有着强度的变化。

表1.3总结信贷消费的决定因素
这些因素将在后面的章节讨论，尤其在欧洲的消费信贷扩散分析中，个人债务的特点，预防和管理过度债务的最有效办法，以及贷款政策将被信用行业所采用。