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.

The theory of financial intermediation highlights various channels through which capital and liquidity are interrelated. Using a simultaneous equations framework, we investigate the relationship between bank regulatory capital and bank liquidity measured from on-balance sheet positions for European and US publicly traded commercial banks. Previous research studying the determinants of bank capital buffer has neglected the role of liquidity. On the whole, we find that banks decrease their regulatory capital ratios when they face higher illiquidity as defined in the Basel III accords or when they create more liquidity as measured by Berger and Bouwman (2009). However, considering other measures of illiquidity that focus more closely on core deposits in the United States, our results show that small banks strengthen their solvency standards when they are exposed to higher illiquidity. Our empirical investigation supports the need to implement minimum liquidity ratios concomitant to capital ratios, as stressed by the Basel Committee; however, our findings also shed light on the need to further clarify how to define and measure illiquidity and also on how to regulate large banking institutions, which behave differently than smaller ones.

We examine how individualism affects bank capital decisions worldwide and in the United States at the state level. Based on a sample of 7034 banks in 68 countries, we establish three major findings. First, individualism is negatively and significantly associated with bank regulatory capital, and the association is independent of the influence of formal institutional environments. Second, effective legal enforcement magnifies individualism's negative effect on bank regulatory capital. Finally, focusing on the United States, we also find that banks in individualistic states hold less regulatory capital than banks in collectivist states do. Effective state-level legal enforcement magnifies the effect of individualism. Our findings suggest that individualism constrains regulators, as regulatory guidelines or formal institutional factors operate very differently depending on the informal institutional environment.

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 article investigates risk and stability features of Islamic banking using a sample of 553 banks from 24 countries between 1999 and 2009. Small Islamic banks that are leveraged or based in countries with predominantly Muslim populations have lower credit risk than conventional banks. In terms of insolvency risk, small Islamic banks also appear more stable. Moreover, we find little evidence that Islamic banks charge rents to their customers for offering Shariá-compliant financial products. Our results also show that loan quality of Islamic banks is less responsive to domestic interest rates compared to conventional banks.

Frictions prevent banks to immediately adjust their capital ratio towards their desired and/or imposed level. This paper analyzes (i) whether or not these frictions are larger for regulatory capital ratios vis-à-vis a plain leverage ratio; (ii) which adjustment channels banks use to adjust their capital ratio; and (iii) how the speed of adjustment and adjustment channels differ between large, systemic and complex banks versus small banks. Our results, obtained using a sample of listed banks across OECD countries for the 2001–2012 period, bear critical policy implications for the implementation of new (systemic risk-based) capital requirements and their impact on banks’ balance sheets, specifically lending, and hence the real economy.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between bank risk and product diversification in the changing structure of the European banking industry. Based on a broad set of European banks for the period 1996–2002, our study first shows that banks expanding into non-interest income activities present higher risk and higher insolvency risk than banks which mainly supply loans. However, considering size effects and splitting non-interest activities into both trading activities and commission and fee activities we show that the positive link with risk is mostly accurate for small banks and essentially driven by commission and fee activities. A higher share of trading activities is never associated with higher risk and for small banks it implies, in some cases, lower asset and default risks.

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.

Bank liquidity shortages during the global financial crisis of 2007–2009 led to the introduction of liquidity regulations, the impact of which has attracted the attention of academics and policymakers. In this paper, we investigate the impact of liquidity regulation on bank lending. As a setting, we use the Netherlands, where a Liquidity Balance Rule (LBR) was introduced in 2003. The LBR was imposed on Dutch banks only and did not apply to other banks operating elsewhere within the Eurozone. Using this differential regulatory treatment to overcome identification concerns and a difference-in-differences approach, we find that the LBR increased the volume of lending by Dutch banks relative to other banks located in the Eurozone. Increased equity, an inflow of retail deposits and subsequent increase in balance sheet size allowed Dutch banks to increase lending despite having to meet the LBR requirements. The LBR also affected the loan composition of Dutch banks (with corporate and retail lending increasing more than mortgage lending) and the maturity profile of loan portfolios. Our results have relevance for policymakers tasked with monitoring the impact of liquidity regulations on banks and the real economy.