Search results

The authors estimate systemic risk in the Korean economy using the econometric measures of commonality and connectedness applied to stock returns. To assess potential systemic risk concerns arising from the high concentration of the economy in large business groups and a few export-oriented sectors, the authors perform three levels of estimation using individual stocks, business groups, and industry returns. The results show that the measures perform well over the study’s sample period by indicating heightened levels of commonality and interconnectedness during crisis periods. In out-of-sample tests, the measures can predict future losses in the stock market during the crises. The authors also provide the recent readings of their measures at the market, chaebol, and industry levels. Although the measures indicate systemic risk is not a major concern in Korea, as they tend to be at the lowest level since 1998, there is an increasing trend in commonality and connectedness since 2017. Samsung and SK exhibit increasing degrees of commonality and connectedness, perhaps because of their heavy dependence on a few major member firms. Commonality in the finance industry has not subsided since the financial crisis, suggesting that systemic risk is still a concern in the banking sector.

This chapter investigates the presence of a difference in the systemic risk level between Islamic and conventional banks in Bangladesh. The authors compare systemic resilience of three types of banks: fully fledged Islamic banks, purely conventional banks (CB), and CB with Islamic windows. The authors use the market-based systemic risk measures of marginal expected shortfall and systemic risk to identify which type is more vulnerable to a systemic event. The authors also use ΔCoVaR to identify which type contributes more to a systemic event. Using a sample of observations on 27 publicly traded banks operating over the 2005–2014 period, the authors find that CB is the least resilient sector to a systemic event, and is the one that has the highest contribution to systemic risk during crisis times.

In this paper, the authors investigate whether the systemic local banking crises (LBCs) and global financial crisis (GFC) impact the association between bank profit efficiency and earnings quality in developing economies.

Using panel data spanning 29 years over the period 1991–2019 for 169 banks drawn from five East African countries, the authors perform difference-in-difference multivariate analyses using the generalised method of moments (GMM) system estimator on a sample consisting of 2,261 bank-year observations.

The results, which are robust for endogeneity and other checks, show that banks with higher profit efficiency consistently report higher quality earnings. The authors further establish that whereas systemic LBCs contribute negatively to bank earnings quality, the GFC tends to have a positive impact. These results are upheld when the joint impacts of both systemic LBCs, GFC and profit efficiency on earnings quality are considered. The positive influence of profit efficiency and GFC on earnings quality is pronounced under income-decreasing earnings management. The impacts of profit efficiency, LBCs and GFC on earnings quality appear to be non-monotonic and vary across the sampled countries.

The study's findings are based on banks in five developing countries within a regional economic bloc. Additional studies could focus on other economic blocs for enhanced generalisability of the findings. In addition, some of the variables examined are studied at bank-level, while other variables are at country-level. Finally, the study establishes an association between the variables of interest, and this does not necessarily imply causation.

The results provide useful insights to bank regulatory and supervisory agencies on the need to exercise increased risk-based scrutiny over bank loan loss provisioning and minimum loan loss reserve requirements. From an audit perspective, auditors need to be cautious and apply an enhanced risk-based audit especially when auditing banks during and after a financial, banking or systemic crisis. Credit rating agencies need to pay closer attention to the LLPs of distressed banks. Finally, bank investors and customers should be cautious when using bank financial statements, since bank managers of poorly performing banks might engage in aggressive earnings management.

The study is perhaps the first to examine the joint effects of systemic LBCs on the association between bank profit efficiency and the quality of earnings in a larger dataset of banks in a developing regional economic bloc. The authors also employ the GMM system estimator in the modelling, which helps address some weaknesses in prior studies.

The paper models the financial interconnectedness and systemic risk of shadow banks using Granger-causal network-based measures and takes the Indian shadow bank crisis of 2018–2019 as a systemic event.

The paper employs pairwise linear Granger-causality tests adjusted for heteroskedasticity and return autocorrelation on a rolling window of weekly returns data of 52 financial institutions from 2016 to 2019 to construct network-based measures and calculate network centrality. The Granger-causal network-based measure ranking of financial institutions in the pre-crisis period (explanatory variable) is rank-regressed with the ranking of financial institutions based on maximum percentage loss suffered by them during the crises period (dependent variable).

The empirical result demonstrated that the shadow bank complex network during the crisis is denser, more interconnected and more correlated than the tranquil period. The closeness, eigenvector, and PageRank centrality established the systemic risk transmitter and receiver roles of institutions. The financial institutions that are more central and hold prestigious positions due to their incoming links suffered maximum loss. The shadow bank network also showed small-world phenomena similar to social networks. Granger-causal network-based measures have out-of-sample predictive properties and can predict the systemic risk of financial institutions.

The study considers only the publicly listed financial institutions. Also, the proposed measures are susceptible to the size of the rolling window, frequency of return and significance level of Granger-causality tests.

Supervisors and financial regulators can use the proposed measures to monitor the development of systemic risk and swiftly identify and isolate contagious financial institutions in the event of a crisis. Also, it is helpful to policymakers and researchers of an emerging economy where bilateral exposures' data between financial institutions are often not present in the public domain, plus there is a gap or delay in financial reporting.

The paper is one of the first to study systemic risk of shadow banks using a financial network comprising of commercial banks and mutual funds. It is also the first one to study systemic risk of Indian shadow banks.

Systemic banking crises can have devastating effects on the economies of developing or industrialized countries. This paper reviews the factors that weaken banking systems and make them more susceptible to crises. It is the first of two papers examining root causes of banking crises and time-consistent policies for resolving them.

This study aims to investigate the influence of systemic banking crises, currency crises and global financial crisis on the relationship between export and economic growth in China by using the annual time series data from the period of 1972 to 2014.

The Johansen and Jeuuselius’ cointegration, auto regressive distributed lag bound testing cointegration, Gregory and Hansen’s cointegration and pooled ordinary least square techniques with error correction model have been used.

Results indicate the positive and significant effect of export of goods and services on economic growth in both long and short run, whereas the negative influence of systemic banking crises and currency crises over economic growth is observed. It is also concluded that the impact of export of goods and service on economic growth becomes insignificant in the presence of systemic banking crises and currency crises. The currency crises effect the influence of export on economic growth to a higher extent compared to systemic banking crises. Surprisingly, the export in the period of global financial crises has a positive and significant influence over economic growth in China, which conclude that the global financial crises did not drastically affect the export-growth nexus.

This paper makes a unique contribution to the literature with reference to China, being a pioneering attempt to investigate the effects of systemic banking crises and currency crises on the relationship of export and economic growth by using long-time series data and applying more rigorous econometric techniques.

The purpose of this paper is to test empirically the impact of asset securitization and sale activities as well as the holdings of sub-prime related securitized products on the US bank holding companies’ (BHC) exposure to systemic risk.

This paper adopts a robust econometric method to estimate the conditional value-at-risk as a measure of BHCs' institutional sensitivity to market crushes. Using the data over the period of 2004-2016, the study also uses OLS with robust standard errors and panel estimation with random effects as two alternative estimation techniques to assess the impact of securitization activities on the sensitivity of BHCs to systemic risk.

Residential mortgage and other forms of securitization activities are positively related to an increase in the US BHCs' sensitivity to systemic distress. The significant cross effects of both securitized loans and holdings of securitized products play a crucial role in determining risks in financial sector.

This study contributes to the empirical literature on the effects of securitization on BHCs' risk exposures in several ways. First, the paper considers the complexity of the bank's risk profile; it focuses on BHCs' individual sensitivity to systemic distress and its dependence on the size of securitization and assets sold activities considering both supply and demand sides of securitization. Second, the time horizon under investigation sheds a light on the relationship between securitization and banks' risk exposures including the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods.

The COVID-19 wave spread all over the global market, affecting all industries. This paper aims to develop the understanding of how service systems can enhance their viability when facing rapid systemic changes.

The authors use data from Reddit, and particularly the subreddit r/coronavirus, to identify posts that discuss the impact of coronavirus on business. The authors use an algorithm to scrape the data with business-related search terms and elaborate relevant posts.

The findings show key topics and related sentiments on the impact of COVID-19 on business. Service systems can enhance viability by identifying alternative paths for emerging opportunities (by being creative), seize opportunities offered by the changing environment (by being opportunistic), not compromise conditions for internal balance (by being resilient), focus attention on critical purposes (by being essential) and perform nonharmful actions (by being responsible).

This paper proposes a framework depicting five possible key enhancers of viability to face a systemic crisis. In brief, companies need to ensure that they are creative, opportunistic, resilient, essential and responsible.

The authors provide a comprehensive study on systemic risk of the banking sectors in the ASEAN-6 countries. In particular, they investigate the systemic risk dynamics and determinants of 49 listed banks in the region over the 2000–2018 period.

The authors employ the market-based SRISK measure of Brownlees and Engle (2017) to investigate the systemic risk of the ASEAN-6's banking sectors.

The authors find that the regional systemic risk fluctuates significantly and currently at par or higher level than that of the recent global financial crisis. Systemic risk is generally associated with banks that have bigger size, more traditional business models, lower quality in their loan portfolios, less profitable and with lower market-to-book values. However, these relationships vary significantly between ASEAN countries.

The research focuses on the systemic risk of ASEAN-6 countries. Therefore, the research results may lack generalizability to other countries.

The authors’ empirical evidence advocates the use of capital surcharges on the systemically important financial institutions. Although the region has been pushing to higher financial integration in recent years, the authors encourage the regional regulators to account for the idiosyncratic characteristics of their banking sectors in designing effective macroprudential policy to contain systemic risk.

This paper provides the first study on the systemic risk of the ASEAN-6 region. The empirical evidence on the drivers of systemic risk would be of interest to the regional regulators.

This study investigates the risk-taking behavior of financial institutions in the USA. Specifically, differences between taking risks that affect primarily the shareholders of the institution and risks contributing to the overall systemic risk of the financial sector are examined. Additionally, differences between risk-taking before, during and after the financial crisis of 2007/2008 are examined.

To analyze the determinants of stand-alone and systemic risk, a generalized linear model including size, governance, charter value, business cycle, competition and control variables is estimated. Furthermore, Granger causality tests are conducted.

The results show that systemic risk has a positive effect on valuation and that corporate governance has no significant effect on risk-taking. The influence of competition is conditional on the state of the economy and the risk measure used. Systemic risk Granger-causes idiosyncratic risk but not vice versa.

The major limitations of this study are related to the analyzed subset of large financial institutions and important risk-culture variables being omitted.

The broad policy implication of this paper is that systemic risk cannot be lowered by market discipline due to the moral hazard problem. Therefore, regulatory measures are necessary to ensure that individual financial institutions are not endangering the financial system.

This study contributes to the empirical literature on bank risk-taking in several ways. First, the characteristics of systemic risk and idiosyncratic risk are jointly analyzed. Second, the direction of causality of these two risk measures is examined. Moreover, this paper contributes to the discussion of the effect of competition on risk-taking.