Green banks vs. non-green banks: A Differences-in-Differences CAMEL-based approach

Ioannis Malandrakis, Konstantinos Drakos
{"title":"Green banks vs. non-green banks: A Differences-in-Differences CAMEL-based approach","authors":"Ioannis Malandrakis, Konstantinos Drakos","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3663894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The need for the transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy has led to the creation of the so-called green banks, while many financial institutions around the world are gradually adjusting their loan portfolio to a greener one by financing environment-friendly projects. Using a panel data set of 165 global and non-global banks from 38 countries worldwide, covering the period 1999 – 2015, we examine whether there are any discernible performance differences between green and non-green banks. The variables of interest are fundamental CAMEL factors. By employing panel data techniques, we investigate whether there are statistically significant differences between the two groups. Moreover, we adopt the Differences-in-Differences approach to examine whether green banks (“treatment” group) and non-green banks (“control” group) exhibit differential behavior, and we use the financial crisis outbreak as the time of intervention. We find that both green and non-green banks are affected by nearly the same bank-specific factors and that they do not exhibit heterogeneous behavior with respect to several fundamental aspects. Specifically, our results show that green banks – whether global or not – perform better than their non-green counterparts only in terms of Total Capital Ratio and Tier1 Capital Ratio during and after the financial crisis. As for the rest of the CAMEL factors, it seems that both groups exhibit the same behavior, especially in the post-crisis period. In addition, our results indicate that the financial crisis has: (a) a positive effect on capital adequacy (excluding Leverage Ratio which seems to have remained unaffected), on asset quality and management quality; (b) a negative effect on earnings ability; (c) a negative impact on liquidity, for both bank types. These results seem robust for the pre- and, especially, the post- 2007-2008 financial crisis periods.","PeriodicalId":105811,"journal":{"name":"Econometric Modeling: Agriculture","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometric Modeling: Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3663894","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The need for the transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy has led to the creation of the so-called green banks, while many financial institutions around the world are gradually adjusting their loan portfolio to a greener one by financing environment-friendly projects. Using a panel data set of 165 global and non-global banks from 38 countries worldwide, covering the period 1999 – 2015, we examine whether there are any discernible performance differences between green and non-green banks. The variables of interest are fundamental CAMEL factors. By employing panel data techniques, we investigate whether there are statistically significant differences between the two groups. Moreover, we adopt the Differences-in-Differences approach to examine whether green banks (“treatment” group) and non-green banks (“control” group) exhibit differential behavior, and we use the financial crisis outbreak as the time of intervention. We find that both green and non-green banks are affected by nearly the same bank-specific factors and that they do not exhibit heterogeneous behavior with respect to several fundamental aspects. Specifically, our results show that green banks – whether global or not – perform better than their non-green counterparts only in terms of Total Capital Ratio and Tier1 Capital Ratio during and after the financial crisis. As for the rest of the CAMEL factors, it seems that both groups exhibit the same behavior, especially in the post-crisis period. In addition, our results indicate that the financial crisis has: (a) a positive effect on capital adequacy (excluding Leverage Ratio which seems to have remained unaffected), on asset quality and management quality; (b) a negative effect on earnings ability; (c) a negative impact on liquidity, for both bank types. These results seem robust for the pre- and, especially, the post- 2007-2008 financial crisis periods.
绿色银行与非绿色银行:基于骆驼模型的差异分析方法
从高碳经济向低碳经济转型的需要催生了所谓的绿色银行,而世界各地的许多金融机构正在通过资助环境友好型项目,逐步调整其贷款组合,使其更加绿色。利用1999年至2015年期间全球38个国家的165家全球性和非全球性银行的面板数据集,我们研究了绿色银行和非绿色银行之间是否存在任何可识别的绩效差异。感兴趣的变量是基本的CAMEL因素。通过采用面板数据技术,我们调查了两组之间是否存在统计学上的显著差异。此外,我们采用差异中的差异方法来检验绿色银行(“治疗”组)和非绿色银行(“对照组”组)是否表现出差异行为,并以金融危机爆发为干预时间。我们发现绿色银行和非绿色银行都受到几乎相同的银行特定因素的影响,并且它们在几个基本方面没有表现出异质行为。具体而言,我们的研究结果表明,绿色银行(无论是全球性的还是非全球性的)仅在金融危机期间和之后的总资本比率和一级资本比率方面表现优于非绿色银行。至于CAMEL因素的其余部分,似乎两组人表现出相同的行为,尤其是在后危机时期。此外,我们的结果表明,金融危机具有:(a)对资本充足率(不包括杠杆率,似乎没有受到影响),资产质量和管理质量的积极影响;(b)对盈利能力产生负面影响;(c)对两种银行类型的流动性产生负面影响。这些结果对于金融危机前,尤其是2007-2008年金融危机后的时期来说似乎是强有力的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信