scholarly journals A Simultaneous Stochastic Frontier Model with Dependent Error Components and Dependent Composite Errors: An Application to Chinese Banking Industry

Mathematics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianxu Liu ◽  
Mengjiao Wang ◽  
Ji Ma ◽  
Sanzidur Rahman ◽  
Songsak Sriboonchitta

The paper develops a simultaneous equations stochastic frontier model (SFM) with dependent random noise and inefficiency components of individual equations as well as allowing dependence across all equations of the model using copula functions. First, feasibility of our developed model was verified via two simulation studies. Then the model was applied to assess cost efficiency and market power of the banking industry of China using a panel data of 37 banks covering the period 2013–2018. Results confirmed that our simultaneous SFM with dependent random noise and inefficiency components outperformed its predecessor, which is a simultaneous SFM with dependent composite errors but with independent random noise and inefficiency components of individual SFMs as well as the conventional single-equation SFM. Apart from the statistical and computational superiority of our developed model, we also see that Chinese banks in general have a high level of cost efficiency and that competition in the banking industry of China mainly exists in state-owned banks and joint stock banks. Presence of economies of scales as well as diseconomies of scales were found in different banks. Also, the state-owned banks embraced most sophisticated technologies thereby allowing them to operate with the highest level of cost efficiency.

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-227
Author(s):  
Phong Hoang Nguyen ◽  
Duyen Thi Bich Pham

PurposeThe paper aims to enrich previous findings for an emerging banking industry such as Vietnam, reporting the difference between the parametric and nonparametric methods when measuring cost efficiency. The purpose of the study is to assess the consistency in issuing policies to improve the cost efficiency of Vietnamese commercial banks.Design/methodology/approachThe cost efficiency of banks is assessed through the data envelopment analysis (DEA) and the stochastic frontier analysis (SFA). Next, five tests are conducted in succession to analyze the differences in cost efficiency measured by these two methods, including the distribution, the rankings, the identification of the best and worst banks, the time consistency and the determinants of efficiency frontier. The data are collected from the annual financial statements of Vietnamese banks during 2005–2017.FindingsThe results show that the cost efficiency obtained under the SFA models is more consistent than under the DEA models. However, the DEA-based efficiency scores are more similar in ranking order and stability over time. The inconsistency in efficiency characteristics under two different methods reminds policy makers and bank administrators to compare and select the appropriate efficiency frontier measure for each stage and specific economic conditions.Originality/valueThis paper shows the need to control for heterogeneity over banking groups and time as well as for random noise and outliers when measuring the cost efficiency.


This chapter provides additional empirical evidence on the efficiency in cooperative banks and savings banks by applying a stochastic frontier model to estimate the cost efficiency from nine countries over the period 2005 to 2011. The empirical results suggested that a higher rate of the gross domestic product (GDP) growth implies an increase in the inefficiency level, while smaller cooperative and savings banks are more efficient in managing costs compared to larger banks.


2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Tan ◽  
Christos Floros ◽  
John Anchor

Purpose This study aims to test the impacts of risk-taking behaviour, competition and cost efficiency on bank profitability in China. Design/methodology/approach A two-step generalized method of moments system estimator is used to examine the impacts of risk, competition and cost efficiency on profitability of a sample of Chinese commercial banks over the period 2003-2013. Findings The paper finds that credit risk, liquidity risk, capital risk, security risk and insolvency risk significantly influence the profitability of Chinese commercial banks. To be more specific, credit risk is significantly and negatively related to bank profitability; liquidity risk is significantly and positively related to return on assets (ROA) and net interest margin (NIM) but negatively related to return on equity (ROE); capital risk has a significant and negative impact on ROA and NIM but a positive impact on ROE; there is a significant and negative impact of security risk on bank profitability (ROA and NIM). It is found that Chinese commercial banks with higher levels of insolvency risk have higher profitability (ROA and ROE). Finally, higher competition leads to lower profitability in the Chinese banking industry, and Chinese commercial banks with higher levels of cost efficiency have lower ROA. In other words, the structure–conduct–performance paradigm rather than the efficient–structure paradigm holds in the Chinese banking industry. Originality/value This is the first paper to investigate the impact of different types of risk, including credit risk, liquidity risk, capital risk, security risk and insolvency risk, on bank profitability. This is the first study which uses more accurate measurements of efficiency and competition compared to previous Chinese banking profitability literature and which tests their impact on bank profitability. The findings not only provide a general picture on the risk, efficiency and competition conditions in the Chinese banking industry, but also give valuable information to the Chinese Government and to the banking regulatory authorities to make relevant policies.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 1056-1068 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Arbelo ◽  
Pilar Pérez-Gómez ◽  
Marta Arbelo-Pérez

This study employs a stochastic frontier model to estimate cost efficiency and its determinants in the hotel industry in Spain between 2008 and 2012. Measuring cost efficiency provides useful information on the performance of hotels to management, shareholders and, in general, to all stakeholders. Cost control is an issue managers are particularly concerned about, as it gives a competitive advantage that allows hotels to perform better. The results indicate that the inefficiency in average costs for the sample considered is 32.44% and is time invariant. The results also show that labour productivity, the accumulation of knowledge and location are factors that largely determine the differences in efficiency between hotels. These findings have important implications for public policymakers and hotel management, specifically, policies aimed at improving the skills of hotels’ human resources should be encouraged. Likewise, both location and the accumulation of knowledge are strategic resources that hotel management must include in their competitive strategies to increase efficiency.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (01) ◽  
pp. 1950007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoqian Zhu ◽  
Jianping Li ◽  
Dengsheng Wu

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) states that in addition to the fact that it lacks simplicity, the Advanced Measurement Approach (AMA) must be discarded because the flexibility of AMAs does not narrow as envisioned prior. This paper discusses whether this judgment of the BCBS holds for the Chinese banking industry. We first review the development of operational risk data collection and AMAs in China over the past decade. Then, capital requirement results for Chinese banks based on these datasets and approaches are summarized and analyzed. It is shown that along with the accumulation of operational risk data and the refinement of AMAs, operational risk results for the Chinese banking industry have shown a clear trend of convergence that is exactly opposed to judgments of the BCBS. Therefore, the removal of the AMA from regulatory frameworks may not be reasonable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document