随着中国经济的不断发展，经济结构的不断优化升级，货币政策在调整宏观经济，维持物价稳定的同时，还肩负了调整银行体系流动性，维持金融稳定的新使命，因此货币政策对银行流动性创造的影响研究成为具有理论价值和实践意义的研究领域。理论界一致认为宽松的货币政策会带来宽松的市场流动性，但这一结论并无法解释近年来出现的“钱荒”现象。那么在货币政策传导至银行体系流动性再传导至市场流动性这一传导过程中何处产生了“堵点”，何种影响因素会“加速”或“减速”传导，成为一个值得研究的课题。本文以货币政策至银行体系流动性这一传导过程为研究对象，从影响机理入手，以银行流动性创造指标衡量银行体系流动性，用理论分析和实证检验相结合的方法，研究货币政策对银行流动性创造的影响。 金融危机爆发后，理论界对于银行治理的关注与日俱增，学者们的研究表明银行治理对银行绩效、风险、信贷行为等多个维度产生影响。但是在货币政策传导至银行体系流动性的过程中，银行治理的作用还很少被提及。因此本文以银行治理为出发点，从外部治理环境和内部治理机制两个视角，研究银行治理对银行流动性创造的影响，并进一步分析银行治理在货币政策传导过程中是否存在调节作用。本文的主要内容和研究结论包括以下四个方面： 第一，本文将货币政策、银行治理与流动性创造纳入同一分析框架，建立理论模型。首先分析货币政策与银行流动性创造的关系，模型推演结果揭示了市场基准利率与银行流动性创造的负向关系，即宽松的货币政策下银行创造更多的流动性。然后分别引入银行外部治理环境和内部治理机制参数，深入分析银行治理对货币政策与银行流动性创造关系的调节作用。模型推演结论显示内部治理水平较高的银行，其流动性创造对货币政策的变化反应越敏感，加速货币政策的传导。银行外部治理环境发挥作用时，其对货币政策与银行流动性创造的关系产生调节作用，不同的外部治理环境因素产生不同的调节方向。 第二，实证研究货币政策与银行流动性创造关系。从多个角度选取货币政策代理变量，试图寻找对调整银行体系流动性有效的货币政策工具。本文利用2003-2017年中国银行业数据实证检验发现，价格型货币政策对银行流动性创造调整效果显著，宽松货币政策下银行创造更多的流动性，验证了理论模型结论的有效性，并对理论模型进行进一步研究发现，价格型货币政策对银行的表内业务流动性创造作用效果更显著。五大国有银行、城市商业银行及农村商业银行的流动性创造水平对货币政策的反应更敏感，货币政策对小规模银行作用效果更显著。 第三，实证研究货币政策、银行外部治理环境与流动性创造关系。由于银行治理存在特殊性，本文仅从外部行业竞争、外部政府干预和外部法律环境三个角度刻画银行外部治理环境，利用2003-2017年中国银行业数据实证检验发现，外部行业竞争对银行流动性创造有消极影响，对货币政策的传导产生“减速”作用，且对于风险承担较高的银行而言，外部行业竞争对银行流动性创造的冲击更显著，对货币政策传导的“减速”作用也更显著。外部政府干预对银行流动性创造有积极影响，对货币政策的传导产生“加速”作用，在经济发达地区，地方政府干预的积极效果更显著。外部法律环境对银行流动性创造有积极影响，并且外部法律环境对非跨区域经营的城市商业银行流动性创造的影响更显著。 第四，实证研究货币政策、银行内部治理机制与流动性创造关系。从单个治理机制和综合治理水平两个角度选取代理变量，利用2003-2017年中国银行业数据实证检验不同的单一内部治理机制对银行流动性创造的不同影响，以及银行综合内部治理水平对银行流动性创造的积极影响，并深入研究银行上市情况不同以及银行性质不同时，银行各个内部治理机制对流动性创造的影响是否存在差异，以及对货币政策与银行流动性创造关系的调节作用是否存在差异。经过实证检验，理论模型推演结论的有效性得以验证，单个银行内部治理机制对货币政策的传导均有“加速”作用。 本文的创新之处在于：第一，本文将货币政策与流动性创造纳入同一理论模型进行分析，并加入银行治理参数，对银行治理的调节作用展开分析，分别研究货币政策与流动性创造、银行治理与流动性创造以及货币政策、银行治理与流动性创造的关系。第二，本文通过对中国银行业数据进行实证检验，多个角度选取银行治理的代理变量，研究发现银行内部治理机制和外部治理环境分别对其流动性创造产生直接影响，丰富了国内关于银行流动性创造影响因素的研究。第三，在对中国银行业数据进行深入研究后发现，高水平的银行内部治理加速货币政策对流动性创造的影响，而银行外部治理环境的不同，对货币政策与流动性创造关系的调节作用产生不同的方向，对理论模型给予了验证与扩展，对银行治理的重要性给予关注并提出改善建议。

With the development of Chinese economy, the monetary policy has the new mission of adjusting the liquidity of the banking and maintaining financial stability. Therefore, the impact of monetary policy on the bank liquidity creation has become a research with theoretical value and practical significance. The loose monetary policy will bring the loose market liquidity, which has been proved many times. But in the recently years, the phenomenon of the “Money Shortage” can not be explained by this conclusion, and then from the Monetary Policy to the liquidity of the banking, we will research what will be blocking the transmission, and how to impact the transmission. In order to research the transmission process, this paper will begin with the theoretical model, and then testify the theoretical conclusion with the data of chinese banking. After the financial crisis, the researchers pay more attention to the bank governance. Many papers find that the bank governance is the important factor to bank performance,bank risk taking, and the bank credit. But in the transmission of the Monetary Policy to the liquidity of the bank, what’s the role of the bank governance? So this paper examines the interplay among the Monetary Policy, the Bank Governance and the Bank liquidity Creation. We find that: Firstly, we put the Monetary Policy, the bank governance and the Bank liquidity creation in the same model. We find that the monetary policy has statistically significant on liquidity creation. The external governance circumstance and the internal governance mechanism have the statistically significant on the the transmission of the Monetary Policy to the liquidity of the bank. The internal governance mechanish has the postive effect, and then the external governance circumstance has the negative effect. Secondly, we examine the the interplay among the Monetary Policy and the bank liquidity creation.We find that different kind of the Monetary Policy has the same effect on the bank liquidity creation. And with the different bank property,different bank size, the liquidity creation has the different effect by the monetary policy stock. Thirdly, we examine the interplay among the Monetary Policy, the external governance environment and the bank liquidity creation. In the paper, we have three perspectives of the external governance environment. There are bank competition, the government intervene and the external law environment. At the basic examine, we find the relationship of the external governance environment and the bank liquidity creation. And then, we examine the adjustment function of external govenance environment. We find that the bank competition is the retarder of the Monetary Policy. And the government intervene is the accelerator of the Monetary Policy. Fourthly, we examine the interplay among the Monetary Policy, the internal governance mechanism and the bank liquidity creation. In this paper, we examine three sole inernal governance mechanism, such as the Proportion of independent directors, the largest share of shareholders and the number of directors. We examine the effect of the sole mechanism to the bank liquidity creation firstly. And then we examine the effect of the corporate governance index on the bank liquidity creation. At the last, we examine the adjusting function of the internal governance mechanism.We find that all of the three internal governance mechanism are the accelerator of the Monetary Policy. The innovations of this paper: Firstly, this paper put the Monetary Policy, the bank governance and the liquidity creation into the same theoretical model, and find the adjustment function of bank governance. Secondly, through the empirical of Chinese banking data, this paper examine the interplay between the bank governance and the bank liquidity creation from the two perspectives, such as the internal governance mechanism and the external governance environment. We enriches the domestic research on the influencing factors of bank liquidity creation. Thirdly, we examine the adjusting function of the bank governance to the Monetary Policy with chinese banking data. We find that the bank competition is the retarder, and the internal governance mechanism and the government intervene are the accelerator.