【正文】 d to create modern mercial banking sectors immediately. The first rudimentary step was to divest mercial and retail activities from the portfolios of national banks and to set up new jointstock banks with universal licenses that were fully stateowned initially. Bank privatization was an essential part of the financial reform agendas in these countries. Although much descriptive work exists on these financial sector reforms and bank privatizations, ., Bonin, Mizsei, Sz233。kely, and Wachtel (1998), no systematic empirical work was possible until sufficient time had elapsed to make the construction of a meaningful dataset possible. The basic issue to investigate is whether or not privatization improves bank performance. Although the theoretical literature indicates that private firms should outperform governmentowned firms, empirical evidence is needed to confirm this theoretical hypothesis for banks in transition countries.The empirical literature provides evidence of the influence of ownership on the performance of individual banks and on the effectiveness of the banking sector. In a crosscountry study, La Porta, LopezDeSilanes, and Shleifer (2002) find that the performance of governmentowned banks is inferior to that of private banks. Claessens, Demirg252。 by mid1997, eight of the top ten banks were majority foreignowned. After a few initial bank privatizations, the Polish government became sidetracked by a bank consolidation initiative that was intended to fend off foreign petition. Nonetheless, a bination of mergers and privatizations involving foreign partners left foreigner investors holding more than 75% of Polish banking assets by 2000. t was late to recognize the importance of attracting strategic foreign investors for its large voucherprivatized banks, all major banks were sold to foreign owners by mid2001. instituting a currency board and stabilizing the macroeconomic environment, the Bulgarian government privatized its first bank to a consortium of investors in the end of 2000, eight of the ten largest banks in Bulgaria were foreign owned. Romania is a laggard in bank privatization pared to the other former CPEs. holdings in Croatia, foreigner investors had acquired about 84% of banking assets by 2000 and, by 2002, all of the ten largest banks in the country were majority foreign owned. In summary, Hungary was the first country to shed the legacies of the CPE by privatizing all but one of its major banks by mid1997. In Poland, after some delay in the privatization timetable, only the zloty savings bank and the umbrella agricultural bank remain statecontrolled. Initially, the Czech Republic placed three big banks in the voucher privatization program but, despite a late start, foreign investors gained control of all large Czech banks by mid2001. The banking sectors in Bulgaria, Romania, and Croatia were financially distressed in the first half of the 1990s, albeit for different reasons, so that bank privatization could not begin until the late 1990s. Once started, sales of banks to foreign investors were rapid in Bulgaria and Croatia. Romania is the only one of the six transition countries in this study to retain significant government ownership in its banking sector through 2003 with only one of its three largest banks privatized.轉(zhuǎn)型國家的銀行民營化效率作者：約翰在大多數(shù)情況下，新設(shè)金融組織旨在支持中央計劃機關(guān)，新政府紛紛采取措施建立現(xiàn)代商業(yè)銀行部門。調(diào)查的基本問題是，銀行的私有化是否能夠提高銀行業(yè)績。從1988年至1995年的8年期間，Claessens，Demirg252。此外，他們聲稱它促進了早期的私有化浪潮。自1995年至1999年，布赫（2000）比較了包括匈牙利，波蘭和捷克共和國在內(nèi)的三個快速轉(zhuǎn)型期國家的利率差。然而，這些作者不能對民營化展開直接調(diào)查，因為他們的調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)不區(qū)分外資銀行所有權(quán)的不同類型。這些作者發(fā)現(xiàn)的數(shù)據(jù)表明，信貸的分配和效率在民營化銀行中更高。我們的選擇中不包括那些非常小的轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟體的銀行，例如，波羅的海國家和斯洛文尼亞，以及先進的轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟體中那些最近才重組銀行系統(tǒng)的國家，例如，前蘇聯(lián)，阿爾巴尼亞和其他巴爾干國家。在本節(jié)中，我們提出銀行的效率值，以及財務(wù)業(yè)績，與所有權(quán)的類型和民營化的第二階段回歸方法。在大多數(shù)中央計劃經(jīng)濟中，大型專業(yè)銀行執(zhí)行特定功能。建設(shè)銀行資助長期資本項目和基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的發(fā)展。專業(yè)銀行已在其核心業(yè)務(wù)壟斷，例如，儲蓄銀行往往廣