National culture and financial literacy: international evidence

ABSTRACT

We examine to what extent (aspects of) national culture can explain cross-country variations in financial literacy. Our results, for a sample of 92 countries, show that Hofstede’s dimensions of power distance and individualism explain, respectively, over 40 and 60 per cent – which is substantially more than national cognitive scores and standard economic variables. In particular, we find that financial literacy is lower in countries where power distance is high, and that the opposite is true for individualism. Uncertainty avoidance would seem be negatively related with financial literacy, but the evidence is not so strong. For masculinity, indulgence, and long-term orientation we find no significant impact. Overall, our results highlight the need for additional (interdisciplinary) theories that can improve our understanding of the determinants of financial literacy and better guide policies in this area.     

National culture and (dis)trust in banks: Cross-country evidence

We examine to what extent a specific aspect of national culture—uncertainty avoidance—can explain cross-country variations in (dis)trust in banks. Relying on data from the World Values Survey, we find that trust in banks is lower in countries that score high for Hofstede's uncertainty avoidance index. Similarly, with Global Findex data, we find that financial exclusion due to a lack of trust in banks is high in high uncertainty avoidance cultures. These results highlight the need for a more culturally aware approach when designing consumer protection measures for the banking sector.     

The impact of cross-border acquisitions on target banks’ performance in an institutionally poor environment: Ukraine’s takeover wave

We investigate the impact of the 2005–2007 cross-border bank takeovers in Ukraine – a country with poor institutional quality – on the performance of the target banks. Because acquirers targeted mainly larger, less-capitalised banks, we control for selection bias by combining propensity score matching and a difference-in-difference methodology. We find that the cost efficiency of the acquired banks improved after takeover (because of a decreased reliance on deposits), but that neither their profitability nor their loan market shares increased. Overall, our findings tally only piecemeal with the existing multi-country studies for transition economies. This argues in favour of additional single-country research.