测试美国银行如何在巴塞尔协议 III 框架下创造信贷

IF 7.5 1区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE International Review of Financial Analysis Pub Date : 2024-09-21 DOI:10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103590
{"title":"测试美国银行如何在巴塞尔协议 III 框架下创造信贷","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper revisits the determinants of the loan generating process as it is revealed through the idiosyncratic role of banks, in the case of the United States. Specifically, if banks are primarily mainstream “financial intermediaries”, then their financial role is expressed through a credit growth process emanating from the reserves of banks, in the period before Basel requirements, and from banks' equity during the era of Basel I, II &amp; III restrictions. On the other hand, if banks are primarily “credit and money creators”, as an heterodox point of view would have it, then every proxy of the aggregate demand (AD) needs, is expected to play a leading role in the credit creation process. The innovative liquidity risk ratios, like LCR &amp; NFSR, brought new instruments in this debate thus, extending the alternatives between the two extremes. Hence, the combination of a predominant role for AD needs along with acknowledgment of liquidity restrictions as drivers of credit growth, characterises an eclectic approach. According to our empirical results, credit to both US firms and households, is primarily driven by aggregate demand (AD) factors. Solvency and liquidity risk ratios do play a role, during the examined period but the overall results are closer to the eclectic approach, concerning the role of US banks, which seems to be more encompassing and realistic.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48226,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Financial Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing how banks generate credit in the USA under the Basel III framework\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper revisits the determinants of the loan generating process as it is revealed through the idiosyncratic role of banks, in the case of the United States. Specifically, if banks are primarily mainstream “financial intermediaries”, then their financial role is expressed through a credit growth process emanating from the reserves of banks, in the period before Basel requirements, and from banks' equity during the era of Basel I, II &amp; III restrictions. On the other hand, if banks are primarily “credit and money creators”, as an heterodox point of view would have it, then every proxy of the aggregate demand (AD) needs, is expected to play a leading role in the credit creation process. The innovative liquidity risk ratios, like LCR &amp; NFSR, brought new instruments in this debate thus, extending the alternatives between the two extremes. Hence, the combination of a predominant role for AD needs along with acknowledgment of liquidity restrictions as drivers of credit growth, characterises an eclectic approach. According to our empirical results, credit to both US firms and households, is primarily driven by aggregate demand (AD) factors. Solvency and liquidity risk ratios do play a role, during the examined period but the overall results are closer to the eclectic approach, concerning the role of US banks, which seems to be more encompassing and realistic.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Financial Analysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Financial Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521924005222\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Financial Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521924005222","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以美国为例,重新探讨了通过银行的特殊作用揭示的贷款产生过程的决定因素。具体而言,如果银行主要是主流的 "金融中介",那么在巴塞尔协议要求之前的时期,其金融作用就会通过银行的储备金以及巴塞尔协议 I、II & 和 III 限制时期的银行股本所产生的信贷增长过程来体现。另一方面,如果银行主要是 "信贷和货币创造者",正如异端观点所认为的那样,那么总需求(AD)的每一个代理变量都将在信贷创造过程中发挥主导作用。创新的流动性风险比率,如 LCR & NFSR,为这场辩论带来了新的工具,从而扩大了两个极端之间的选择范围。因此,既承认 AD 需求的主导作用,又承认流动性限制是信贷增长的驱动力,这两者的结合是一种折衷方法的特点。根据我们的实证结果,美国企业和家庭的信贷主要由总需求因素驱动。在研究期间,偿付能力和流动性风险比率确实发挥了一定作用,但总体结果更接近折衷方法,即美国银行的作用,这似乎更全面、更现实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Testing how banks generate credit in the USA under the Basel III framework
This paper revisits the determinants of the loan generating process as it is revealed through the idiosyncratic role of banks, in the case of the United States. Specifically, if banks are primarily mainstream “financial intermediaries”, then their financial role is expressed through a credit growth process emanating from the reserves of banks, in the period before Basel requirements, and from banks' equity during the era of Basel I, II & III restrictions. On the other hand, if banks are primarily “credit and money creators”, as an heterodox point of view would have it, then every proxy of the aggregate demand (AD) needs, is expected to play a leading role in the credit creation process. The innovative liquidity risk ratios, like LCR & NFSR, brought new instruments in this debate thus, extending the alternatives between the two extremes. Hence, the combination of a predominant role for AD needs along with acknowledgment of liquidity restrictions as drivers of credit growth, characterises an eclectic approach. According to our empirical results, credit to both US firms and households, is primarily driven by aggregate demand (AD) factors. Solvency and liquidity risk ratios do play a role, during the examined period but the overall results are closer to the eclectic approach, concerning the role of US banks, which seems to be more encompassing and realistic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.80%
发文量
366
期刊介绍: The International Review of Financial Analysis (IRFA) is an impartial refereed journal designed to serve as a platform for high-quality financial research. It welcomes a diverse range of financial research topics and maintains an unbiased selection process. While not limited to U.S.-centric subjects, IRFA, as its title suggests, is open to valuable research contributions from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Strategic tone management in ESG reports and ESG risk Investigating investor attention to carbon risk from a supply chain perspective Does social responsibility reform curb corporate greenwashing: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China Fee structure and equity fund manager’s optimal locking in profits strategy Beyond the balance sheet: Assessing corporate governance through the Lens of debtholders
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1