Syajarul Imna Mohd Amin, Aisyah Abdul-Rahman, Nurhafiza Abdul Kader Malim
{"title":"伊斯兰合作组织(OIC)银行业流动性风险与监管","authors":"Syajarul Imna Mohd Amin, Aisyah Abdul-Rahman, Nurhafiza Abdul Kader Malim","doi":"10.21315/aamajaf2021.17.2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recurring crises have evidenced poor liquidity risk management and ineffective\nregulation in banking. Consequently, banking regulations have undergone continuous reforms to bolster stability in the banking system. Nonetheless, theoretical and empirical evidence provide conflicting results that warrant comprehensive research, particularly for emerging Islamic banking. This study examines the role of banking regulation on the liquidity risk of 245 conventional banks and 68 Islamic banks from selected 14 Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) from 2000 to 2017 utilising the dynamic panel GMM (generalized method of moments) technique. We measure liquidity risk using the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) and the total financing-to-total deposits and short-term funding (LDEP). Meanwhile, the regulatory measures are asset restriction (AR), private monitoring (PM), supervisory power (SP) and capital requirements (CR). The findings suggest that regulation has a limited impact on bank liquidity risk. The CR supports the value creation of regulation through the reduction in banks’ liquidity risks, while PM and SP are agency costs of regulation that lead to higher liquidity risks. The impact of CR is lower on liquidity risk in Islamic banking than conventional ones, probably due to limited Islamic liquidity risk management facilities. Thus, regulators should strengthen Islamic liquidity risk instruments and markets to facilitate Islamic banking growth.","PeriodicalId":44370,"journal":{"name":"Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liquidity risk and regulation in the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) banking industry\",\"authors\":\"Syajarul Imna Mohd Amin, Aisyah Abdul-Rahman, Nurhafiza Abdul Kader Malim\",\"doi\":\"10.21315/aamajaf2021.17.2.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The recurring crises have evidenced poor liquidity risk management and ineffective\\nregulation in banking. Consequently, banking regulations have undergone continuous reforms to bolster stability in the banking system. Nonetheless, theoretical and empirical evidence provide conflicting results that warrant comprehensive research, particularly for emerging Islamic banking. This study examines the role of banking regulation on the liquidity risk of 245 conventional banks and 68 Islamic banks from selected 14 Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) from 2000 to 2017 utilising the dynamic panel GMM (generalized method of moments) technique. We measure liquidity risk using the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) and the total financing-to-total deposits and short-term funding (LDEP). Meanwhile, the regulatory measures are asset restriction (AR), private monitoring (PM), supervisory power (SP) and capital requirements (CR). The findings suggest that regulation has a limited impact on bank liquidity risk. The CR supports the value creation of regulation through the reduction in banks’ liquidity risks, while PM and SP are agency costs of regulation that lead to higher liquidity risks. The impact of CR is lower on liquidity risk in Islamic banking than conventional ones, probably due to limited Islamic liquidity risk management facilities. Thus, regulators should strengthen Islamic liquidity risk instruments and markets to facilitate Islamic banking growth.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21315/aamajaf2021.17.2.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21315/aamajaf2021.17.2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Liquidity risk and regulation in the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) banking industry
The recurring crises have evidenced poor liquidity risk management and ineffective
regulation in banking. Consequently, banking regulations have undergone continuous reforms to bolster stability in the banking system. Nonetheless, theoretical and empirical evidence provide conflicting results that warrant comprehensive research, particularly for emerging Islamic banking. This study examines the role of banking regulation on the liquidity risk of 245 conventional banks and 68 Islamic banks from selected 14 Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) from 2000 to 2017 utilising the dynamic panel GMM (generalized method of moments) technique. We measure liquidity risk using the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) and the total financing-to-total deposits and short-term funding (LDEP). Meanwhile, the regulatory measures are asset restriction (AR), private monitoring (PM), supervisory power (SP) and capital requirements (CR). The findings suggest that regulation has a limited impact on bank liquidity risk. The CR supports the value creation of regulation through the reduction in banks’ liquidity risks, while PM and SP are agency costs of regulation that lead to higher liquidity risks. The impact of CR is lower on liquidity risk in Islamic banking than conventional ones, probably due to limited Islamic liquidity risk management facilities. Thus, regulators should strengthen Islamic liquidity risk instruments and markets to facilitate Islamic banking growth.
期刊介绍:
To provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and dissemination of empirical findings and analytical research in the specialized areas of accounting and finance with special emphasis on scholarly works with policy implications for countries in the Asia Pacific. The following are some of the topical subject areas relevant to the journal (but are not limited to): Accounting • Financial reporting and accounting standards • Auditing issues • Value based accounting and its relevance • Theory of accounting firm • Environmental auditing • Corporate governance issues • Public sector accounting Finance • Valuation of financial assets • International capital flows • Ownership and agency theory • Stock market behavior • Investment and portfolio management • Islamic banking and finance • Microstructures of financial markets