This study analyzes the evolution of climate-risk discourse in banking using 4,887 news articles (2008–2024) collected from ProQuest. We apply Natural Language Processing and add two novel layers: (i) an event-alignment analysis that links coverage dynamics to dated policy and supervisory milestones, and (ii) a discourse-network analysis connecting banks and regulators. We document a marked post-2020 shift, with ESG emerging as the dominant framing (7,860 mentions) alongside persistent geographic asymmetries (U.S.-led coverage) and uneven sectoral engagement (Risk Management highest salience; Fintech lowest). Sentiment skews positive (≈4,000 positive vs. ≈1,500 negative), and topic modeling identifies eight stable thematic clusters spanning operations, ratings, ESG assessment, disclosures, and market instruments. Event alignment shows media attention is typically anticipatory (median peak two months before an anchor), with COP26 producing a sustained level shift (+100% within a ±6-month window) and the Bank of England’s CBES results generating the largest single spike (210 articles), whereas some 2022 rule-making announcements (e.g., SEC climate-disclosure proposal) exhibit sharper but less durable attention. The discourse network centers on two regulatory hubs (the Federal Reserve and the ECB) with key banks (e.g., Citigroup, JPMorgan, UBS) bridging into supervisory narratives. Collectively, the findings show climate risk becoming embedded in core banking practice while revealing structural, regional, and functional asymmetries that matter for policy design and implementation. • Provides the first longitudinal NLP-based analysis of climate risk discourse in the banking sector • Reveals how climate risk integration in banking has evolved across regulatory, operational, and market dimensions • Identifies distinct thematic domains shaping climate risk narratives in banking over time • Shows that climate risk discourse is predominantly anticipatory around major policy and supervisory milestones • Maps the institutional structure of climate risk governance by linking banks and regulators within a discourse network

We discuss the implications on banks and the economy of prudential regulatory intervention to soften the treatment of non-performing exposures (NPEs) and ease bank capital buffers. We apply these easing measures on a sample of Globally Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs) and show that these banks can play a constructive role in sustaining economic growth during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, an empirical analysis shows that prudential regulatory responses to COVID-19 along with high regulatory capital and low non-performing loans ratios are positively associated with economic growth. Thus, banks should maintain high capital ratios in the medium-term horizon to absorb future losses, as the effect of COVID-19 on the economy might take time to fully materialize.

We investigate the influence of the institutional environment on bank capital ratios. Using a sample of 160 banks operating in the Middle East and North Africa region for the period 2004–2014, we find that, when stock markets have little presence, institutional variables significantly affect risk-weighted regulatory capital ratios but not leverage ratios. Conversely, when stock markets are more developed, only leverage ratios are influenced by institutional factors. Our results also indicate that institutional variables affect non-weighted equity-to-asset ratios of banks that are listed on a stock exchange. Our findings contribute to the bank capital structure literature and have important policy implications for developing countries.

This paper investigates the pricing of insolvent banks in the U.S. that are sold under the purchase and assumption resolution method of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). We consider quarterly data for 444 acquisitions of insolvent U.S. banks between 2009 and 2016. We find that acquirers not only pay higher prices for insolvent banks with larger core deposits, as has been highlighted by the literature (and is consistent with the FDIC’s beliefs), but also for those banks with larger branch networks that are less dispersed geographically. When the acquirers bid (separately) for the assets of the insolvent banks, they place a positive value on the number of branches of the insolvent bank, but appear to be insensitive to geographic dispersion. Acquirers also pay more for banks with a national charter. The results additionally show that failed banks are most likely to be acquired by relatively large and highly capitalized banks whose organic growth is not affected in the years following the acquisition. Overall, our findings contribute to a better understanding of the implications of the purchase and assumption resolution method for the FDIC and for the banking industry.

In this paper, we explore whether economic uncertainty differently affects the default risk of Islamic and conventional banks. Using a sample of 568 banks from 20 countries between 2009 and 2018, we use the World Uncertainty Index (WUI) by Ahir et al. (2018) to conduct a study based on a comparable measure across countries. Our findings indicate that economic uncertainty increases the default risk of conventional banks but does not affect Islamic banks’ default risk. To understand why, we explore the influence of religiosity, institutional factors, and bank-level heterogeneity. We observe that Islamic banks’ default risk is not significantly affected by uncertainty in all types of countries, but such a difference with conventional banks mainly holds for banks with higher income diversification, larger size, and that are publicly traded. Moreover, our findings show that conventional banks suffer more from uncertainty in terms of stability in countries with higher religiosity and with a higher share of profit-loss sharing (PLS) contracts. Our results are robust to alternative estimation techniques to deal with endogeneity and to alternative variable measurements.

Banks play a central role in the financial system and benefit the real economy by managing risk, and providing finance to households, small and medium-sized enterprises, large corporates and governments. However, their complexity, opacity and interconnectedness can elevate bank-level and systemic risks, posing dangers to the financial system and real economy. This was evident during the global financial crisis where taxpayer funded bailouts were used to rescue ailing banks, which in turn led to an overhaul of regulation and supervision. Consequently, safeguarding bank stability and addressing systemic risks via well designed regulations is essential for ensuring economic resilience and societal well-being. This study uses a quasi-natural experimental research design in the form of the Dutch Liquidity Balance Rule (LBR) to evaluate the impacts of liquidity regulation on bank-level stability and systemic risk. Our findings show that following the introduction of liquidity regulation, the stability of Dutch banks increases significantly relative to counterparts in neighbouring countries unaffected by the regulation. The observed reduction in risk stems from improved capitalization and reduced leverage, which contribute to greater financial stability. Systemic risk also decreases. Our findings have relevance beyond our research setting for policymakers tasked with implementing and monitoring the impacts of similar forms of liquidity regulation (such as bank liquidity coverage ratios) post global financial crisis.