进入21世纪以来，我国金融业快速增长并过度扩张，经济呈现过度金融化的态势，长此下去，会对我国社会经济产生不利的影响和严重的后果。为此，本文围绕“我国金融发展过度”这个主题，首先对我国金融发展是否过度进行了实证检验，然后基于实体部门增长、信贷结构、家庭债务三个视角，考查了我国金融发展过度的影响因素，并指出金融发展过度会导致我国社会经济难以高质量、有效率的增长，且采用实证的分析方法在产业层面对此后果进行了证实。旨在回答：第一，我国金融发展是否已经过度？ 第二，影响我国金融发展过度的因素有哪些？第三，我国金融发展过度的经济后果是什么？全文共分为七章，各章主要内容如下： 第一章为引言，主要是选题的背景、问题的提出与研究的意义，并指出了本文的研究框架、研究方法以及本文的贡献。 第二章为文献综述部分。通过对金融发展的相关理论进行回顾，发现传统的金融发展理论过度强调金融发展在经济增长中的促进作用，而对于金融发展的负面影响认识还不够；次贷危机以来，金融发展对经济增长的负面作用日益引起学术界的关注。“金融发展过度”相关的研究逐渐成为金融研究领域中的一个重要分支。 第三章对本文的研究背景进行了进一步的描述。阐述了改革开放以来我国金融发展的历史进程，并指出目前我国金融发展过度膨胀的现实情况。 第四章通过构建动态面板数据门限回归模型对我国金融发展是否过度进行了实证检验。实证结果显示我国在2008年之前除个别省份外大部分省份的金融发展并没有呈现出过度的状态，但这种情况在2008年之后结束，从2009年开始我国金融发展过度的情况在增加，更是在2013年之后呈现出全面过度的状态。 第五章基于实体部门增长、信贷结构、家庭债务三个视角，采用理论与实证相结合的分析方法，探讨了我国金融发展过度的影响因素。首先在新古典经济理论的框架下，构建了一个由金融部门与实体部门组成的两部门经济模型，以此说明实体部门增长落后对金融发展过度的影响。然后将“两部门的增长模型”拓展至一个包含金融部门、实体生产部门、家庭与人力资本部门的“多部门内生增长”模型，并将信贷结构因素纳入金融部门的变动函数，从信贷结构这一新的视角，理论上说明了信贷结构对金融发展过度的影响。继而放松家庭部门同质性的假定，将家庭分为有信贷行为的家庭与无信贷行为的家庭，并针对不同类型家庭加入不同的预算约束条件，由此构建起一个异质性家庭模型，以此来说明家庭债务对金融发展过度的影响。在这些理论分析的基础上，本章分别就实体部门增长、信贷结构、家庭债务对我国金融发展与经济增长关系的影响，通过构建动态面板数据门限回归模型进行了实证研究。实证结果发现如果实体部门增长与金融部门增长的差距过大、信贷结构失衡、家庭债务比攀升，并超过一定的门限值时，受其影响，我国金融发展与经济增长呈现负相关的关系。 第六章指出金融发展过度会导致我国社会经济难以高质量、有效率的增长，并在产业层面，以全要素增长率（TFP）作为经济高质量增长的衡量指标，测算了第一、二、三产业的全要素生产率，然后采用似不相关的回归方法（SUR），证实了我国金融发展并没有促进经济的高质量、有效率增长。 第七章为结论与展望。本章对全文的研究结论进行了总结，并提出了相应的政策建议，最后指出了本文的研究局限及下一步研究的建议。 本文的贡献主要体现在理论模型上的拓展与内容上的创新两个方面。理论模型上的拓展主要有两点： （1）本文第五章在内生增长理论的框架下建立了一个包含金融部门的多部门模型，在此基础上，本文将信贷结构因素纳入金融部门的变动函数，从信贷结构这一新的视角，理论上说明了信贷结构与金融发展、经济增长的关系。 （2）本文第五章还在Bhattacharya和Patnaik(2015)模型的基础上，结合了中国资本项目还没有完全开放的实际现实，对Bhattacharya和Patnaik(2015)模型中引用的Schmitt-Grohe和Uribe(2003)的利率方程重新进行了解释：假定利率仅受中国人民银行基准利率及债务波动的影响。然后证明了家庭的信贷行为主要通过消费来影响宏观经济增长。 研究内容上的创新主要有以下三点： （1）对于我国金融发展是不是过度的问题，本文收集了2004年第一季度到2017年第四季度全国30个省（直辖市）的相关季度数据，然后通过构建动态面板数据门限回归模型对我国金融发展是否过度进行了较为科学的实证检验。本文的实证结果进一步确认了索有（2016）采用1999年-2013年数据得到我国部分地区存在金融发展过度的研究结论，但是对于2013年之后的金融发展状况，本文的研究结果却显示我国金融发展呈现全面过度的状态。 （2）本文第五章基于实体部门增长、家庭债务等视角，探讨了其对我国金融发展与经济增长负相关关系的影响。基于实体部门增长的视角，本文用工业增加值的增长率来衡量实体部门的增长，以金融发展指标的增长率来代理金融部门的增长，继而以两者之差来代理实体部门增长相对于金融部门的“落后”程度，证实了实体部门增长的相对落后是我国金融发展过度的重要影响因素，从而拓展了有关我国金融发展过度问题的研究；基于家庭债务的视角，本文首次从家庭债务这个新的视角来研究其对我国金融发展过度的影响，认为家庭债务的过度是造成我国金融发展与经济增长呈现负相关关系的重要影响因素。 （3）本文第六章涉及到三次产业全要素增长率（TFP）的测算，本文在研究过程中发现三次产业TFP的核算经常有被两个方面被忽略：一是物质资本存量的测算涉及到资本的折旧率，那么不同产业的折旧率应该是有差异的，但是大多数的研究均是假设不同的产业拥有相同的折旧率；二是用各产业从业劳动力人数来衡量劳动投入，但是没有考虑到劳动力的质量与效率。基于此，本文在对三次产业TFP测算的过程中：用人均人力资本反映劳动力的质量，以人力资本存量替代劳动力从业人数；考虑到产业的差异性，放弃三次产业同样折旧率的假定，重新估算了我国1990年-2016年三次产业的TFP值，使得三次产业的TFP值更能够反映技术的进步。在此基础上，本文进一步以TFP作为经济高质量增长的衡量指标，采用似不相关的回归方法（SUR），对三次产业金融发展与全要素生产率的关系进行了实证研究。从而拓展了产业层面上有关“金融发展与经济增长”关系的研究。 本文通过以上研究得到以下结论：近年来我国金融业呈现过度发展的状态；实体部门增长相对于金融部门的差距过大、信贷结构失衡、家庭债务过度是我国金融发展过度的重要影响因素；金融过度发展会导致我国社会经济难以高质量的增长。因此，本文提出了以下对策建议：首先，应高度重视我国金融过度扩张与过度发展的问题，并注意保持金融体系的稳健；其次，要全力促进实体经济的增长、合理调整优化信贷结构并防止家庭债务过度；同时，要着力解决科技型企业的金融支持问题。

Since the 21st century, China's financial industry has grown rapidly and expanded excessively, and the economy has become over-financialized. In the long run, it will have adverse effects and serious consequences on China's social economy. For this reason, this paper focuses on the theme of "too much finance in China". Firstly, it conducts an empirical estimation on whether China's finance is too much. Then, based on the three perspectives of real sector growth, credit structure and household debt, it examines the determinants of “too much finance”in China, and points out that “too much finance” will make it difficult for China's socio-economic growth to be of high quality and efficiency. And the empirical analysis method is used to confirm the consequences at the industrial level. The purpose is to answer: First, China's finance is too much? Secondly, what are the derterminants of “too much finance” in China? Third, what are the impact of “too much finance”in China? The full text is divided into seven chapters. The main contents of each chapter are as follows: The first chapter is the introduction, which mainly focuses on the background of too much finance in China, the significance of this paper, and points out the framework, methods and contributions of this paper. Chapter 2 reviews the theory of financial development, and finds that the traditional theory of financial development overemphasizes the role of financial development in promoting economic growth, but the negative impact of financial development is not attracted attention. Since the subprime crisis, the negative effect of financial development on economic growth has increasingly attracted the attention, and the related research of “too much finance” has gradually become an important branch of research on finance. Chapter 3 gives a further description of the background of this paper. This paper expounds the historical process of China's financial development since the reform and opening up, and points out the reality of “too much finance” in China. Chapter 4 empirically estimates whether China's finance is too much by constructing a dynamic panel data threshold regression model. Empirical results show that the financial development of most provinces except some provinces did not show “too much finance” before 2008, but this situation ended after 2008. Since 2009, the situation of “too much finance”in China has increased, especially after 2013. The fifth chapter, based on the three perspectives of real sector growth, credit structure and household debt, explores the determinants of “too much finance”in China by using the method of theoretical with empirical analysis. Firstly, under the framework of neoclassical economic theory, a two-sector economic model composed of financial sector and real sector is constructed to illustrate the impact of backward growth of real sector on”too much finance” in China. Then the “two-sector growth model” is extended to a “multi-sector endogenous growth” model including financial sector, real production sector, household and human capital sector, and credit structure factors are incorporated into the function of the financial sector. From the new perspective of credit structure, the impact of credit structure on “too much finance”is theoretically explained. Then relax the assumption of homogeneity of household, divide households into credit-bearing households and credit-free households, and add different budget constraints to different types of households, so as to build a heterogeneous household model to illustrate the impact of household debt on “too much finance”in China. On the basis of these theoretical analysis, this chapter empirically studies the impact of real sector growth, credit structure and household debt on the relationship between financial development and economic growth in China by constructing a dynamic panel data threshold regression model. The empirical results show that if the gap between the growth of the real sector and the growth of the financial sector is too large, the credit structure is unbalanced, the ratio of household debt rises, and exceeds a certain threshold value, the financial development and economic growth in China show a negative correlation. Chapter 6 points out that “too much finance” will make it difficult for China's finance to promote high-quality and efficient economic growth. At the industrial level, TFP is used as a measure of high-quality economic growth, and TFP of the first, second and third industries is calculated. Then, the seemingly unrelated regression method (SUR) is used to confirm that China's finance can not promote high-quality and efficient economic growth. Chapter 7 is the conclusion. This chapter summarizes the conclusions of the full text, and puts forward the counter-measures. Finally, it points out the limitations of this paper and suggestions for further research. The contribution of this paper is mainly the expansion of theoretical model and the innovation of research content. There are two main points in the expansion of the theoretical model: (1) The fifth chapter establishes a multi-sectoral model including the financial sector under the framework of endogenous growth theory. On this basis, this paper incorporates credit structure factors into the function of the financial sector. From the new perspective of credit structure, the relationship between credit structure and financial development and economic growth is theoretically explained. (2) Chapter 5 also reinterprets the interest rate equations by Schmitt-Grohe and Uribe (2003) cited in the Bhattacharya and Atnaik (2015) models. This paper considering the fact that China's capital account is not yet fully open. It assumes that interest rates are only affected by the fluctuation of the benchmark interest rate of the People's Bank of China and household debt. Then it proves that household credit behavior mainly affects macroeconomic growth through consumption. There are three main innovations in the research contents: (1) As to whether China's finance is too much, this paper collects the relevant quarterly data of 30 provinces from the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2017, and then constructs a dynamic panel data threshold regression model to estimates whether China's finance is too much. The empirical results of this paper further confirm the conclusion of Suo You (2016) who used the data of 1999-2013 to draw the conclusion that there is “too much finance”in some areas of China. However, this paper shows that China's finance is too much after 2013. (2) Chapter 5 explores the negative correlation between financial development and economic growth in China from the perspectives of real sector growth and household debt. Based on the perspective of real sector growth, this paper uses the growth rate of industrial added value to measure the growth of real sector, uses the growth rate of financial development indicators to represent the growth of financial sector, and then uses the difference between the two sectors to represent the "backwardness" degree of real sector growth compared with the financial sector, which confirms that the backwardness of real sector growth is an important impact of China's excessive financial development. Based on the perspective of household debt, this paper studies the impact of household debt on too much finance in China for the first time, and considers that the excessive household debt is an important factor that causes the negative relationship between China's financial development and economic growth. (3) Chapter 6 deals with the calculation of total factor growth rate (TFP) of three industries. It is found that the caculation of TFP of three major industries is often ignored in two aspects: First, the accounting of material capital stock involves the depreciation rate of capital, so the depreciation rate of different industries should be different, but most studies assume that different industries have the same depreciation rate;the second is to measure labor input by the number of employees in various industries, but the quality and efficiency of labors are not taken into account. Based on this, in the TFP calculation of three industries, this paper uses human capital per capita to reflect the quality of labor force, replacing the number of workers with human capital stock; considering the differences of industries, giving up the assumption of the same depreciation rate of three industries and re-estimating the TFP value of three industries in China from 1990 to 2016, so that the TFP value of three industries can better reflect technology advance. Then this paper further takes TFP as a measure of high-quality economic growth, and uses the seemingly unrelated regression method (SUR) to make an empirical estimation on the relationship between the financial development and total factor productivity of three industries. Thus, it expands the research on the relationship between financial development and economic growth at the industrial level. This paper draws the following conclusions: in recent years, China's finance industry is too much; the backward growth of the real sector, unbalanced credit structure and excessive household debt are the determinants affecting “too much finance”in China; “too much finance” will lead to the difficulty of high-quality economic growth in China. Therefore, this paper puts forward the following countermeasures: firstly, the government should attach great importance to the problem of financial over-expansion in China, and pay attention to maintaining the stability of the financial system; secondly, should make every effort to promote the growth of the real economy, rationally adjust and optimize the credit structure and prevent the excessive household debt; at the same time, should focus on solving the problem of financial support for technology-based enterprises.