Ownership, Governance, and Bank Performance: Korean Experience

The paper examines the effect of ownership and governance on firm performance. Tracing the post financial crisis experience, 1998–2002, of the Korean commercial bank industry, the paper investigates whether the involvement of foreign investors in the ownership structure had any significant effect on the banks' performance i.e., return and risk measures. Further, it examines the effects of the presence of outside directors, especially directors from foreign countries, in the corporate board structure impacts banks performance. Evidence indicates that the extent of the foreign ownership level, not the mere existence of foreign ownership, has a significant positive association with the bank return and a significant negative association with the bank risk. The number of outside board of directors does not have any significant affect on performance however the presence of a foreign director on that board is significantly associated with bank return and risk. These findings are relatively robust under the different specifications of performance measures.     

Corporate governance and bank performance: A joint analysis of the static,selection, and dynamic effects of domestic,foreign, and state ownership

We jointly analyze the static, selection, and dynamic effects of domestic, foreign, and state ownership on bank performance. We argue that it is important to include indicators of all the relevant governance effects in the same model. “Nonrobustness” checks (which purposely exclude some indicators) support this argument. Using data from Argentina in the 1990s, our strongest and most robust results concern state ownership. State-owned banks have poor long-term performance (static effect), those undergoing privatization had particularly poor performance beforehand (selection effect), and these banks dramatically improved following privatization (dynamic effect), although much of the measured improvement is likely due to placing nonperforming loans into residual entities, leaving “good” privatized banks.     

Risk management,corporate governance,and bank performance in the financial crisis

The recent financial crisis has raised several questions with respect to the corporate governance of financial institutions. This paper investigates whether risk management-related corporate governance mechanisms, such as for example the presence of a chief risk officer (CRO) in a bank’s executive board and whether the CRO reports to the CEO or directly to the board of directors, are associated with a better bank performance during the financial crisis of 2007/2008. We measure bank performance by buy-and-hold returns and ROE and we control for standard corporate governance variables such as CEO ownership, board size, and board independence. Most importantly, our results indicate that banks, in which the CRO directly reports to the board of directors and not to the CEO (or other corporate entities), exhibit significantly higher (i.e., less negative) stock returns and ROE during the crisis. In contrast, standard corporate governance variables are mostly insignificantly or even negatively related to the banks’ performance during the crisis.     

Institutional investors and bank governance: An international analysis of bank earnings management

Despite the growing importance of institutional investors in global capital markets and the link between bank earnings management and financial crash risk, little is known about the role of institutional investors in mitigating bank earnings management. We conduct the first international analysis of this issue using a broad sample of banks and institutional investors. We find a negative relation between institutional ownership and bank earnings management, after controlling for the stringency of a country's bank regulations and other relevant bank and country characteristics. Additionally, institutional ownership is more negatively related to earnings management in countries with more-stringent bank disclosure requirements or when ownership is held by domestic rather than foreign institutional investors. Institutional ownership is also more negatively related to earnings management in countries in which insiders extract more private benefits or when ownership is held by institutional blockholders. Our findings have important policy implications regarding institutional investors' engagement with banks.     

Post-crisis regulatory reforms and bank performance: lessons from Asia

Based on a large dataset from eight Asian economies, we test the impact of post-crisis regulatory reforms on the performance of depository institutions in countries at different levels of financial development. We allow for technological heterogeneity and estimate a set of country-level stochastic cost frontiers followed by a deterministic bootstrapped meta-frontier to evaluate cost efficiency and cost technology. Our results support the view that liberalization policies have a positive impact on bank performance, while the reverse is true for prudential regulation policies. The removal of activities restrictions, bank privatization and foreign bank entry has a positive and significant impact on technological progress and cost efficiency. In contrast, prudential policies, which aim to protect the banking sector from excessive risk-taking, tend to adversely affect banks’ cost efficiency but not cost technology.     

Does banks’ dual holding affect bank lending and firms’ investment decisions? Evidence from China

This study investigates the effect of banks’ dual holding on bank lending and firms’ investment decisions using a sample of listed firms in China. We find that dual holding leads to easier access to bank loans, a result that is more pronounced for non-state-owned enterprises (non-SOEs) than SOEs. We also find that dual holding distorts banks’ lending decisions and harms the investment efficiency for SOEs, while resulting in optimal lending decisions and enhanced investment efficiency for non-SOEs. For non-SOEs, further analysis suggests that optimal lending decisions and efficient investment can be achieved for firms with higher ownership concentration, and firms in which the family and foreign investors are the controlling shareholders. We argue that, in emerging markets, whether a bank plays a monitoring role by directly holding the debt and equity claims of companies relies heavily on whether the potential collusion between firm executives and bank managers can be averted, which in turn is determined by the firms’ governance framework and ownership structure.     

The role of governance on bank liquidity creation

This paper examines the impact of internal bank governance on bank liquidity creation in the U.S. before, during and after the 2007–2009 financial crisis. Using bank holding company level data, we analyze whether better-governed banks create higher levels of liquidity. We find that this effect is positive and significant but only for large bank holding companies. Further analysis reveals that specific internal governance categories: CEO education, compensation structure, progressive practices, and ownership have a significant effect on bank liquidity. However, this positive effect occurs mostly during the crisis period, and for large banks that are also high liquidity creators. Finally, we find that the effect of governance on liquidity creation increases during the crisis period. These findings are robust even while controlling for liquidity measures, bank size, and endogeneity problems between governance and liquidity creation.     

Interbank funding,bank risk exposure and performance in the UK: A three-stage network DEA approach

Operating on unsecured interbank markets exposes banks to various risks which trigger changes in bank strategic outcomes such as risk management and performance. This paper proposes a novel three-stage network data envelopment approach with feedback and alliance to examine the importance of bank risk exposures through interbank funding on bank efficiency levels. Our results show that overall bank performance management is achieved via a complement of good alliance between risk and funding, and financial performance. In addition, high financial or overall performance may not imply better risk management or allied process performance. Rather, banks are inherently performance-driven institutions whose performance objectives are independently optimal but aggregately suboptimal. Further analyses show that, for international banks, high financial or overall performance may not necessarily limit high allied process and risk management. Moreover, risk governance in large banks has not improved despite the increased regulatory pressure induced after the 2007–2008 credit crisis. Our results remain robust regardless of whether the alliance or financial performance stage is given priority in the overall efficiency decomposition, and when the novel resource imbalance index is used to assess and enhance the discriminatory power of performance.     

Internal capital markets and lending by multinational bank subsidiaries

We use new panel data on the intra-group ownership structure and the balance sheets of 45 of the largest multinational bank holdings to analyze what determines the credit growth of their subsidiaries. We find evidence for the existence of internal capital markets through which multinational banks manage the credit growth of their subsidiaries. Multinational bank subsidiaries with financially strong parent banks are able to expand their lending faster. As a result of parental support, foreign bank subsidiaries also do not need to rein in their credit supply during a financial crisis, while domestic banks need to do so.     

Institutional development and bank stability: Evidence from transition countries

This paper takes advantage of the dynamic nature of institutional reforms in transition economies and explores the causal effects of those reforms on bank risk. Using a difference-in-difference approach, we show that banks’ financial stability increases substantially after these countries reform their legal institutions, liberalize banking, and restructure corporate governance. We also find that the effects of legal and governance reforms on bank risk may critically depend on the progress of banking reforms. A further examination of alternative risk measures reveals that the increases in financial stability among banks mainly come from the reduction of asset risk. Banks tend to have lower ROA volatility and fewer nonperforming loans after reforming the institutional environment. Finally, we split our sample into foreign and domestic banks and find that the enhancement of financial stability is more pronounced for domestic banks.     

Bank efficiency and foreign ownership: Do good institutions matter?

This paper contributes to the literature on foreign ownership and bank efficiency by examining whether the efficiency of foreign banks depends on the institutional quality of the host country and on institutional differences between the home and host country. Using stochastic frontier analysis for a sample of 2095 commercial banks in 105 countries for the years 1998–2003, we find that foreign ownership negatively affects bank efficiency. However, in countries with good governance this negative effect is less pronounced. We also find that higher quality of the institutions in the home country and higher similarity between home and host country institutional quality reduce foreign bank inefficiency.     

The impact of state ownership on performance differences in privately-owned versus state-owned banks: An international comparison

This paper examines how government ownership and government involvement in a country’s banking system affect bank performance from 1989 through 2004. Our study uncovers an interesting pattern of changing performance differences between state-owned and privately-owned banks around the Asian financial crisis. We find that state-owned banks operated less profitably, held less core capital, and had greater credit risk than privately-owned banks prior to 2001, and the performance differences are more significant in those countries with greater government involvement and political corruption in the banking system. In addition, from 1997 to 2000, the 4-year period after the beginning of the Asian financial crisis, the deterioration in the cash flow returns, core capital, and credit quality of state-owned banks was significantly greater than that of privately-owned banks, especially for the countries that were hardest hit by the Asian crisis. However, state-owned banks closed the gap with privately-owned banks on cash flow returns, core capital, and nonperforming loans in the post-crisis period of 2001–2004. Our findings can best be explained by Shleifer and Vishny’s [Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.W., 1997. A survey of corporate governance. J. Finance 52, 737–783] corporate governance theory on state ownership of firms and Kane’s [Kane, E.J., 2000. Capital movement, banking insolvency, and silent runs in the Asian financial crisis. Pacific-Basin Finance J. 8, 153–175] life-cycle model of a regulation-induced banking crisis.     

Bank discrimination, holding bank ownership, and economic consequences: Evidence from China

This paper finds that compared with Chinese state-owned firms, non-state-owned firms have a greater propensity to hold significant ownership in commercial banks. These results are consistent with the notion that because non-state-owned firms are more likely to suffer bank discrimination for political reasons, they tend to address their financing disadvantages by building economic bonds with banks. We also find that among non-state-owned firms, those that hold significant bank ownership have lower interest expenses, and are less likely to increase cash holdings but more likely to obtain short-term loans when the government monetary policy is tight. These results suggest that the firms building economic bonds with banks can enjoy benefits such as lower financial expenses and better lending terms during difficult times. Finally, we find that non-state-owned firms with significant bank ownership have better operating performance. Overall, we find that firms can reduce discrimination through holding bank ownership.     

Bank reforms,foreign ownership,and financial stability

Numerous studies have focused on foreign ownership of banks, but instead of linkages to financial stability, they typically analyzed other issues and used country-level data. This article fills the gap in the literature by applying the GMM techniques on dynamic panels using bank-level data for Asian countries to investigate the impact of foreign ownership on financial stability, as well as whether the relation between foreign ownership and stability changes under different conditions of bank reforms in the host country. Specifically, we reach five conclusions. First, the existence of the home field advantage hypothesis is supported; nevertheless, when considering the effects of bank reforms, the global advantage hypothesis holds. Second, an inverse U-shaped relation between foreign ownership and stability is supported. Third, a higher degree of credit control liberalization mitigates the negative effect of foreign ownership on stability. Fourth, liberalization of interest rate control and banking supervision do enhance stability. Fifth and finally, we confirm a significantly negative relation between an explicit deposit and stability.     

The role of managerial incentives in bank acquisitions

This paper examines the effect of variables related to management incentives, corporate governance, and performance on the likelihood a bank is acquired. We find that banks with higher levels of management ownership are less likely to be acquired, particularly in acquisitions where target managers depart from their jobs following the acquisition. We document high rates of management turnover following bank acquisitions. This evidence is consistent with an entrenchment hypothesis, where management teams block attempts to be acquired. We find little evidence that any other incentive, governance, or performance variables are systematically related to the probability a bank is acquired.     

Board gender diversity,power, and bank risk taking

Having female board members brings ethical/societal perspectives and new resources to decision making. However, there is lack of evidence on whether it mitigates bank excessive risk-taking; hence, this paper addresses this question. It complements the normative corporate governance literature by combining agency theory and approach/inhibition theory of power from social psychology. For a sample of 195 U.S. commercial banks during 2002–2018, banks invest in more risky assets when female directors perceive the positive rewards of risky investments (in banks that have larger regulatory capital ratios and/or are well-capitalized) and when power shifts away due to CEO equity ownership. On the other hand, banks invest in less risky positions when female directors perceive the penalties inherent in a risky investment during the financial crisis. This paper provides novel evidence on the effect of gender diversity, as a governance mechanism, on risk taking in a social-psychology context. It offers insights on the effect of gender diversity on bank riskiness.     

Bank ownership reform and bank performance in China

Using a panel of Chinese banks over the 1997–2004 period, we assess the effect of bank ownership on performance. Specifically, we conduct a joint analysis of the static, selection, and dynamic effects of (domestic) private, foreign and state ownership. We find that the “Big Four” state-owned commercial banks are less profitable, are less efficient, and have worse asset quality than other types of banks except the “policy” banks (static effect). Further, the banks undergoing a foreign acquisition or public listing record better pre-event performance (selection effect); however, we find little performance change in either the short or the long term.     

The economics of bank privatization

This paper surveys the empirical literature examining bank privatization. We begin by documenting the extent of, theoretical rationale for, and measured performance of state-owned banks around the world, and then assess why many governments have chosen to privatize their often very large state-owned banking sectors. The empirical evidence clearly shows that state-owned banks are less efficient than privately owned banks, and that state domination of banking imposes increasingly severe penalties on those countries with the largest state banking sectors. On the other hand, there is little in the empirical record to suggest that privatization alone transforms the efficiency of divested banks, especially when these are only partially privatized. Privatization generally improves performance, but by far less than is typically observed in studies of non-financial industries. An increasingly common outcome of large-scale bank privatization programs is foreign ownership of many nations’ banking sector, which evidence suggests is usually positive in an economic sense, but problematic politically.     

Quality of information disclosure,property rights,and bank loans: A bank heterogeneity perspective

Using the context of the financial reform and the development of the non-state sector in China in the past decade, we examine the roles that the quality of information disclosure and property rights play in the allocation of different types of bank credit. We find that foreign banks and policy banks exercise “financial discrimination,” and that local commercial banks, large state-owned commercial banks, national joint-stock banks, local city commercial banks, and rural commercial banks not only exercise financial discrimination but also provide significant “financial support” to non-state-owned enterprises by providing more lending opportunities and larger loans. However, when enterprises commit information disclosure violations, the local commercial banks, national joint-stock banks, local city commercial banks, and rural commercial banks reverse their credit decisions and begin to exercise financial discrimination against non-state-owned enterprises. At the same time, large state-owned commercial banks continue to provide financial support to non-state-owned enterprises. We also find that the quality of the information disclosed by enterprises has a moderating effect rather than an intermediary effect on the relationship between property rights and bank loans. Overall, the results of this paper shine new light on the market-oriented reform of the banking industry, and provide new empirical evidence for the presence of financial discrimination in the supply of bank credit. Our findings also have practical implications for solving the financing difficulties of non-state-owned enterprises.     

Foreign Banks: Trends and Impact

Over the past two decades, foreign banks have become much more important in domestic financial intermediation, heightening the need to understand their behavior. We introduce a new, comprehensive database, made publicly available, on bank ownership (including the home country of foreign banks) for 5,324 banks in 137 countries over the period 1995–2009. We document large increases in foreign bank presence in many countries, but with substantial heterogeneity in terms of host and banks’ home countries, bilateral investment patterns, and bank characteristics. In terms of impact, we document that the relation between private credit and foreign bank presence importantly depends on host country and banks’ characteristics. Specifically, foreign banks only seem to have a negative impact on credit in low‐income countries, in countries where they have a limited market share, where enforcing contracts is costly and where credit information is limited available, and when they come from distant home countries. This shows that accounting for heterogeneity, including bilateral ownership, is crucial to better understand the implications of foreign bank ownership.