ظرفیت کاو محیطی و نفوذ همتایان در ریسک تامین نقدینگی بانک ها

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 فارغ التحصیل دکتری مدیریت مالی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

2 دانشیار دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

3 عضو هیئتعلمی دانشگاه صنعتی شریف

4 دانشیار دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

چکیده

نفوذ همتایان در دنیای کسب‌وکار پدیده‌ای فراگیر است و نظریه‌های مختلفی در توضیح آن ارائه‌شده است. با توجه به اینکه پدیده مذکور می‌تواند در حوزه‌های مختلف پیامدهای مختلف مثبت یا منفی داشته باشد، ازاین‌رو در این مقاله با استفاده از نظریه‌های مبتنی بر اطلاعات، مبتنی بر رقابت و نظریه بوم‌شناسی سازمانی و با تعریف شاخصی تحت عنوان ظرفیت کاو محیطی رابطه شاخص مذکور با پدیده نفوذ همتایان در صنعت بانکداری ایران بررسی‌شده است. تا از این طریق بتوان در جهت کنترل پدیده نفوذ همتایان به‌عنوان یک عامل ریسک سیستمیک در صنعت مذکور کمک کرد. نمونه تحقیق شامل کلیه بانک‌های فعال ایران طی سال‌های 1381 تا 1395 و مدل‌های مورداستفاده مدل رگرسیون خطی مبتنی بر رویکرد مانسکی با داده‌های میکرو پنل نامتوازن و روش حداقل مربعات دومرحله‌ای برای تخمین ضریب نفوذ همتایان و مدل رگرسیون خطی با داده‌های سری زمانی برای ارزیابی رابطه نفوذ همتایان با ظرفیت کاو محیطی، ساختار صنعت و عدم اطمینان محیطی است. شواهد نشان می‌دهد ضریب همبستگی شاخص کاو محیطی هم در دوران رونق و هم در دوران رکود معنادار است؛ اما در دوران رکود ضریب مذکور تقریباً 1/2 برابر افزایش می‌یابد که این بیانگر اهمیت مدیریت نقدینگی توسط بانک مرکزی برای کنترل عامل سیستمیک نفوذ همتایان و شکل‌گیری بحران در سیستم بانکی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Environmental Niche Capacity and Peer Effect in Funding Liquidity Risk of Banks

نویسندگان [English]

  • Tayebe Bakhtiarian 1
  • Gholamhossein Asadi 2
  • Hossein Abdo Tabrizi 3
  • Teymor Mohammadi 4
1 PhD student at management and accounting of Shahid Beheshti University
2 Associate Professor Faculty of Management and Accounting of Shahid Beheshti University
3 Assistant Professor Faculty of Sharif University of Technology
4 Associate Professor Faculty of Economics College of Allame Tabataba'i University
چکیده [English]

Peer effects is a pervasive phenomenon in a business world and several theories have been proposed to explain that. Since this phenomenon can have different positive or negative consequences in different domains, therefore, in this paper using information and competition based theories and Organizational ecology theory and By defining an index called environmental niche capacity, the relationship between the index and peer influence has been investigated in banking industry of Iran in order to help to form macro prudential policy to control peer effects as a systemic risk factor in that industry. The research sample includes all active banks of Iran from 2002 to 2016 and the models used are linear regression model based on Manski's approach with unbalanced micro-panel data and two stage least squares method to estimate peer effects coefficient and linear regression model with time series data to evaluate relation between peer effects and environmental niche capacity index and also concentration and uncertainty index. The evidences shows that the correlation of niche index is significant both during boom and bust, but during recession the coefficient is increased by approximately 2/1 times, indicating the importance of liquidity management by central bank to control peer effects systemic factor and crisis formation in the banking system.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • peer effects
  • organizational ecology
  • environmental niche capacity
  • funding liquidity risk
  • banking industry
پژویان، جمشید، شفیعی، افسانه، تحلیل ساختار در صنعت بانکداری ایران، فصلنامه اقتصاد مقداری، دوره پنجم، شماره چهارم، زمستان 1387، صفحات 81-105
روشه، گی، جامعه‌شناسی تالکوت پارسونز، عبدالحسین نیک گهر، تهران، نشر نی،1391.
نادعلی،سنجش میزان شکنندگی نظام بانکی در اقتصاد ایران، فصلنامه روند، سال بیست و سوم، شماره 76، زمستان 1395، صفحات 145- 172
مجاب، رامین (1395). ارزیابی سلامت بانکی و زمینه‌های رخداد بحران بانکی در اقتصاد ایران. دوماهنامه تازه‌های اقتصاد، 149، 64- 60
محمود زاده، مدنی زاده، نظام بانکی ایران:گذشته، حال و آینده، 2ماهنامه تازه‌های اقتصاد، شهریور1395، شماره 149، صفحات 28- 35
 
Acharya, V. (2009). A theory of systemic risk and design of prudential bank regulation. Journal of Financial Stability 5 (3), 224 – 255
Asaba, S., Lieberman, M.(2011). Who Imitates Whom?, Academy of Management Review,  February 19
Baum, J. A. C, Li, S. X.,Usher, J. M.( 2000). Making the Next Move: How Experiential and Vicarious Learning Shape the Locations of Chains’ Acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45,Pages:766-801.
Benhabib,J. , Bisin,A., Jackson, M.(2006). Social Economics: A Brief Introduction to the Handbook, North Holland, 12th November-
Berger, A. N., and Bouwman, C. H. (2009). Bank  liquidity  creation. Review of  Financial Studies, 22(9)
Bettis, A., Weeks(1987). Financial Returns And Strategic Interaction: The Case Of Instant Photography, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.8 Pages:,549-563
Bikhchandani, S. & Sharma, S. (2000). Herd Behaviour in Financial Markets: a review. IMF Working Paper 48, International Monetary Fund, Wahshington, D.C.
Bonfim,Diana,(2014). Liquidity Risk in Banking Is There Herding? , University of Groningen, January 13,6-78
Bonfim, D., Kim M. (2019). Liquidity risk and collective moral hazard, International Journal of Central Banking, forthcoming
Bramoullé, Y., Djebbari, H., and Fortin, B. (2009). Identification of Peer Effects ThroughSocial networks, Journal of Econometrics, 150(1), 41-55
Cao, J. Illing, G. (2010). Regulation of Systemic Liquidity Risk. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 24  
Carroll, G. R. Hannan, M. T. ( 1995). Organizations in Industry: Strategy, Structure and Selection. New York: Oxford University Press
Chino, Atsushi (2012). Two Essays on Payout Policy: Strategic Interaction Effects and Union Effects, University of Washington, A dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Cohen, W. M.  Levinthal, D. A.(1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128-152
Conlisk, John (1980), Costly optimization versus cheap imitators, Journal ofEconomic Behavior and Organization, Pages: 275-293Dimaggio, P. J.  Powell, W. W.(1983). The Iron Cage Revisted: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organization Fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147- 160
Drehmann, M, and N. Nikolaou (2008). Funding Liquidity Risk: Definition and Measurement. mimeo. Working Paper
Farhi, E. Tirol, J. (2012).Bubbly Liquidity. The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 79, Issue 2, Pages 678–706,
Gorton, G.(2015).The Maze of Banking: History, Theory, Crisis, Oxford University , Page 410
Halliday, T. J.; & Kwak, S. (2012). What is a peer? The  role  of  network  definitions in estimation of endogenous peer effects. Applied Economics , 44(3), 289-302.
Hannan,M.T. Freeman,Y(1989).Organizational Ecology, Combridge: Harvard University Press
He D. (2016). Herd Behavior in the Commercial Bank Credit Market. In: Financial Security in China. Research Series on the Chinese Dream and China’s Development Path. Springer, Singapore,  33-45
Hiass,R.(2005). Banks, Herding and Regulation: a Review and Synthesis, Europe Institute University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna , Paper for presentation at the Workshop on Informational Herding Behavior Copenhagen, Sept. 16-18
Horvátha, R.(2014), Peer Effects in Central Banking, Institute of Economic Studies, Charles University, Prague May 2
Jain, A. and S. Gupta (1987), Some Evidence on Herding" Behavior of U. S. Banks,Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 19(1), 78-89
Lee,L. (2007), Identification and Estimation of Spatial Econometric Models with Group Interactions, Contextual Factors and Fixed Effects,Journal of Econometrics 140,Page 333-34
Leary, M.T., Roberts, M.R.(2014), Do Peer Firms Affect Corporate Financial Policy?, The Journal of Finance , No. 1  February, 139-178
Lieberman, M. B.,  Asaba, S.(2004), Why Do Firms Imitate Each Other? Academy of Management Review, 31: 366-385
Llewellyn, D.( 2002), An Analysis of The Causes of Recent Banking Crises. European Journalof Finance 8(2), 152-175
Margaretic, P. & et al. (2019). Measuring endogenous peer effects in interbank markets. Preliminary Version, University of San Andres and Central Bank of Chile
Manski, C.(1993). Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem , Review of Economic Studies 60, 531-542
Matutes, C. & Vives, X. (2000), Imperfect Competition, Risk taking, and Regulation in Banking.European Economic Review, 44: 1-34
Milbourn, T. Boot, A. and Thakor, A. )1999(. Megamergers and expanded scope: theories of bank size and activity diversity. Journal of Banking and Finance,23: 195-214
Nakagawa, R and Uchida, H.(2007).Herd behavior in the Japanese loan market: Evidence from bank panel data, Journal of  Financial Intermediation, Volume 14, Issue 4, 555–583
Peteraf, M. A. (1993), The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based View. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 179-192
Rochet, J. (2008). Why Are There So Many Banking Crises?: The Politics and Policy of Bank Regulation. Princeton University Press.
Rosenkopf, L. Abrahamson, E. )1999(, Modeling Reputation and Information Influences in Threshold Models of Bandwagon Innovation Diffusion. Computational and Mathematical Organizational Theory, 5: 361-384
Schmutte,M,.Ian,)2010(, Notes on the Reflection Problem, March,15
Silva,A. (2016), Strategic Complementarity in Baks’ Funding Choices And financial Stability, Working Paper Series, European Systemic Risk Board, No 19
Silva, A. (2019). Strategic liquidity mismatch and financial sector stability. Review of Financial Studies, forthcoming
Topa, G., Zenou, Y. (2014). Neighborhood and Network Effects. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Volume 5,Chapter 9
Torres, R.O. (2007). Panel Data Analysis, Fixed and Random Effects. Princeton university, using Stata,v. 4.2
Yuehua, L. (2017). Peer Effect in Bank Financial Reporting: Evidence from Loan loss Provision . ( Doctoral thesis).  National  University of  Singapore