This paper uses a panel database of 251 banks in 36 countries to analyze the impact of bank regulation on bank charter value and risk-taking. After controlling for deposit insurance and for the quality of a country's contracting environment, the results indicate that regulatory restrictions increase banks' risk-taking incentives by reducing their charter value. Banks in countries with stricter regulation have a lower charter value, which increases their incentives to follow risky policies. These results corroborate a negative relation between regulatory restrictions and the stability of a banking system. Deposit insurance has a positive influence on bank charter value, mitigating the risk-shifting incentives it creates. This positive influence disappears when we control for the possible endogeneity of deposit insurance

The Pakistani banking system has been transformed over the past 15 years through liberalization, the entry of private banks, the privatization of public-sector banks, and the tightening of prudential regulations. The effects of these changes on bank productivity and relative efficiency are investigated using various techniques. Bank productivity in terms of profits has increased, and new entrants have been efficient, but the dispersion of efficiency remains wide. The privatized banks improved their profit efficiency in the period immediately following their privatization, but in the subsequent years only one significantly improved its efficiency, whereas the other did not differentiate itself in terms of efficiency from the remaining state-owned banks. The new private domestic banks generally proved to be among the most efficient, and sometimes out-performed the foreign banks

This paper proposes a new method to measure and monitor the risk in a banking system. Standard tools that regulators require banks to use for their internal risk management are applied at the level of the banking system to measure the risk of a regulator’s portfolio. Using a sample of international banks from 1988 until 2002, I estimate the dynamics and correlations between bank asset portfolios. To obtain measures for the risk of a regulator’s portfolio, I model the individual liabilities that the regulator has to each bank as contingent claims on the bank’s assets. The portfolio aspect of the regulator’s liability is explicitly considered and the methodology allows a comparison of sub-samples from different countries. Correlations, bank asset volatility, and bank capitalization increase for North American and somewhat for European banks, while Japanese banks face deteriorating capital levels. In the sample period, the North American banking system gains stability while the Japanese banking sector becomes more fragile. The expected future liability of the regulator varies substantially over time and is especially high during the Asian crisis starting in 1997. Further analysis shows that the Japanese banks contribute most to the volatility of the regulator’s liability at that time. Larger and more profitable banks have lower systemic risk and additional equity capital reduces systemic risk only for banks that are constrained by regulatory capital requirements

It is often claimed that well-capitalized banks are less inclined to increase asset risk, because the option value of deposit insurance decreases with capitalization. However, bankers, regulators and some academics challenge this view. Since the traditional view relies on studies that neglect the managerial agency problem and do not consider “higher-risk, higher-return” assets, we revisit the issue assuming that three agents – deposit insurers, shareholders, and managers – all influence banks' risk levels. We examine four distinct assumptions on the characteristics of risk–return profiles and derive conditions under which banks' risk decreases or increases with capitalization

Do bank debtholders discipline excessive risk taking? I investigate this question by examining how a bank's incentives to take risks affect offering yield spreads and restrictive covenants in their debt contracts. Results suggest that bank charter values, which determine a bank's risk-taking incentives, significantly affect the likelihood of restrictive covenants in bank debt contracts. This effect was most pronounced during the 1980s, when greater competition and relatively less-stringent regulation increased the severity of moral hazard problems in the US banking industry. Overall, the results suggest that an important channel for market investors to discipline bank risk taking is through writing restrictive covenants in bank debt

The objective of this paper is to investigate whether financial innovation of credit derivatives makes banks more exposed to credit risk. Although credit derivatives are important for hedging and securitizing credit risk – and thereby likely to enhance the sharing of such risk – some commentators have raised concerns that they may destabilize the banking sector. This paper investigates this issue in a simple model driven by costs of financial distress. The analysis identifies two effects of credit derivatives innovation – they enhance risk sharing as suggested by the hedging argument – but they also make further acquisition of risk more attractive. The latter effect, if dominant, can therefore destabilize the banking sector. The critical factor is, perhaps surprisingly, the competitive nature of the existing underlying credit markets. As these markets become more elastic the threat of destabilization increases. The paper discusses issues related to bank regulation within the context of the model

We analyze a general equilibrium model in which there is both adverse selection of, and moral hazard by, banks. The regulator can screen banks prior to giving them a licence, audit them ex post to learn the success probability of their projects, and impose capital adequacy requirements. Capital requirements combat moral hazard when the regulator has a strong screening reputation, and they otherwise substitute for screening ability. Crises of confidence can occur only in the latter case, and contrary to conventional wisdom, the appropriate policy response may be to tighten capital requirements to improve the quality of surviving banks

There is a large body of literature that concludes that—when confronted with increased competition—banks rationally choose more risky portfolios. We argue that this literature has had a significant influence on regulators and central bankers. We review the empirical literature and conclude that the evidence is best described as “mixed.” We then show that existing theoretical analyses of this topic are fragile, since there exist fundamental risk‐incentive mechanisms that operate in exactly the opposite direction, causing banks to become more risky as their markets become more concentrated. These mechanisms should be essential ingredients of models of bank competition

A multiperiod model is developed to measure the costs posed to the guaranty fund in a setting that incorporates risk-based capital regulations, interest rate risk and the possibility of catastrophic losses. The guaranty contract is modeled as a put option on the asset of the insurance company with a stochastic strike price and an uncertain maturity. The impacts of the key factors of this model are examined numerically and shown to make material differences in the costs to the guaranty fund

This paper provides new insight into the relationship between short sales and stock market returns using a sample of stocks sold short in Canada. Short interest is defined in relation to trading volume. The results strongly support the assertion that short sales and excess returns are contemporaneously negatively correlated in Canada. The paper further finds that excess returns are more negative for small firms because the supply of shortable shares is constrained for these firms. Excess returns are less negative for stocks with associated options and convertible bonds. Importantly, the evidence is consistent with the proposition that informed traders short sell Canadian interlisted stocks in Canada, rather than the US, to exploit lower execution costs. Together the results suggest that less restrictive regulation of short sales will improve the efficiency of markets