巴塞尔协议III流动性监管框架和中东和北非国家的银行流动性创造

IF 2 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance Pub Date : 2021-10-13 DOI:10.1108/jfrc-01-2021-0002
Anas Alaoui Mdaghri, L. Oubdi
{"title":"巴塞尔协议III流动性监管框架和中东和北非国家的银行流动性创造","authors":"Anas Alaoui Mdaghri, L. Oubdi","doi":"10.1108/jfrc-01-2021-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to investigate the potential impact of the Basel III liquidity requirements, namely, the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), on bank liquidity creation.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors developed a dynamic panel model using the Quasi-Maximum Likelihood estimation on an unbalanced panel dataset of 129 commercial banks operating in 10 Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries from 2009 to 2017.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results show that the NSFR significantly negatively affects liquidity creation. Similarly, the LCR exerts a substantial negative impact on the liquidity creation of the sampled MENA banks. These findings suggest that complying with both liquidity requirements tends to curtail liquidity creation. Moreover, further regression analysis of large and small bank sub-samples uncovered results similar to the overall MENA sample.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe findings raise interesting policy implications and suggest a trade-off between the benefits of the financial resiliency induced by implementing liquidity requirements and the creation of liquidity essential for promoting economic growth in the region.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nMost empirical research focuses on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation. To the knowledge, this paper is the first to provide empirical evidence on the effect of both the NSFR and LCR regulatory liquidity standards on bank liquidity creation in the MENA region.\n","PeriodicalId":44814,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Basel III liquidity regulatory framework and bank liquidity creation in MENA countries\",\"authors\":\"Anas Alaoui Mdaghri, L. Oubdi\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jfrc-01-2021-0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to investigate the potential impact of the Basel III liquidity requirements, namely, the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), on bank liquidity creation.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe authors developed a dynamic panel model using the Quasi-Maximum Likelihood estimation on an unbalanced panel dataset of 129 commercial banks operating in 10 Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries from 2009 to 2017.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe results show that the NSFR significantly negatively affects liquidity creation. Similarly, the LCR exerts a substantial negative impact on the liquidity creation of the sampled MENA banks. These findings suggest that complying with both liquidity requirements tends to curtail liquidity creation. Moreover, further regression analysis of large and small bank sub-samples uncovered results similar to the overall MENA sample.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe findings raise interesting policy implications and suggest a trade-off between the benefits of the financial resiliency induced by implementing liquidity requirements and the creation of liquidity essential for promoting economic growth in the region.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nMost empirical research focuses on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation. To the knowledge, this paper is the first to provide empirical evidence on the effect of both the NSFR and LCR regulatory liquidity standards on bank liquidity creation in the MENA region.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-01-2021-0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-01-2021-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文旨在探讨巴塞尔协议III流动性要求,即净稳定融资比率(NSFR)和流动性覆盖率(LCR)对银行流动性创造的潜在影响。作者在2009年至2017年在10个中东和北非(MENA)国家运营的129家商业银行的不平衡面板数据集上使用准最大似然估计开发了一个动态面板模型。研究结果表明,非固定资产收益率显著负向影响流动性创造。同样,LCR对抽样的中东和北非银行的流动性创造产生了实质性的负面影响。这些发现表明,同时遵守这两项流动性要求往往会限制流动性的创造。此外,对大型和小型银行子样本的进一步回归分析揭示了与中东和北非地区整体样本相似的结果。研究局限性/启示研究结果提出了有趣的政策启示,并提出了实施流动性要求所带来的金融弹性效益与促进该地区经济增长所必需的流动性创造之间的权衡。独创性/价值大多数实证研究集中在银行资本与流动性创造之间的关系上。据了解,本文首次提供了实证证据,证明了NSFR和LCR监管流动性标准对中东和北非地区银行流动性创造的影响。
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
Basel III liquidity regulatory framework and bank liquidity creation in MENA countries
Purpose This paper aims to investigate the potential impact of the Basel III liquidity requirements, namely, the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), on bank liquidity creation. Design/methodology/approach The authors developed a dynamic panel model using the Quasi-Maximum Likelihood estimation on an unbalanced panel dataset of 129 commercial banks operating in 10 Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries from 2009 to 2017. Findings The results show that the NSFR significantly negatively affects liquidity creation. Similarly, the LCR exerts a substantial negative impact on the liquidity creation of the sampled MENA banks. These findings suggest that complying with both liquidity requirements tends to curtail liquidity creation. Moreover, further regression analysis of large and small bank sub-samples uncovered results similar to the overall MENA sample. Research limitations/implications The findings raise interesting policy implications and suggest a trade-off between the benefits of the financial resiliency induced by implementing liquidity requirements and the creation of liquidity essential for promoting economic growth in the region. Originality/value Most empirical research focuses on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation. To the knowledge, this paper is the first to provide empirical evidence on the effect of both the NSFR and LCR regulatory liquidity standards on bank liquidity creation in the MENA region.
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
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1992, the Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance has provided an authoritative and scholarly platform for international research in financial regulation and compliance. The journal is at the intersection between academic research and the practice of financial regulation, with distinguished past authors including senior regulators, central bankers and even a Prime Minister. Financial crises, predatory practices, internationalization and integration, the increased use of technology and financial innovation are just some of the changes and issues that contemporary financial regulators are grappling with. These challenges and changes hold profound implications for regulation and compliance, ranging from macro-prudential to consumer protection policies. The journal seeks to illuminate these issues, is pluralistic in approach and invites scholarly papers using any appropriate methodology. Accordingly, the journal welcomes submissions from finance, law, economics and interdisciplinary perspectives. A broad spectrum of research styles, sources of information and topics (e.g. banking laws and regulations, stock market and cross border regulation, risk assessment and management, training and competence, competition law, case law, compliance and regulatory updates and guidelines) are appropriate. All submissions are double-blind refereed and judged on academic rigour, originality, quality of exposition and relevance to policy and practice. Once accepted, individual articles are typeset, proofed and published online as the Version of Record within an average of 32 days, so that articles can be downloaded and cited earlier.
期刊最新文献
CBDCs, regulated stablecoins and tokenized traditional assets under the Basel Committee rules on cryptoassets All are interesting to invest, I fear of missing out (FOMO): a comparative study among self-employed and salaried investors A law and economic analysis of trading through dark pools Financial liberalisation and illicit financial outflows in African countries: does institutional quality and macroeconomic stability matter? Crossing the lines a human approach to improving the effectiveness of the three lines model in practice
×
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