银行贷款难题

A. Blundell-Wignall, Caroline Roulet
{"title":"银行贷款难题","authors":"A. Blundell-Wignall, Caroline Roulet","doi":"10.1787/fmt-2013-5k40m1nz55wj","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Banks are still dealing with historic losses buried in their balance sheets. As a result, the US economy is picking up only modestly and Europe is sinking further into recession, despite unprecedented low interest rates and policies to compress the term premium. The aim of this study is to explore the business activities of banks, with a special focus on their lending behaviour, and its responsiveness to unconventional monetary policy. The paper shows that deleveraging has been mainly via mark-to-market assets falling in value, and policy is now serving to reflate these assets without a strong impact on lending. A panel regression study shows that GSIFI banks are least responsive to policy. Non-GSIFI banks respond to the lending rate spread to cash rates, the spread between lending rates and the alternative investment in government bonds, and the distance-to-default (the banks solvency). The paper shows that better lending in the USA is a result of safer banks and a better spread to government bonds – yields on the latter are too attractive relative to lending rates in Europe. Finally, the paper comments on the problem of using cyclical tools to address structural problems in banks, and suggests which alternative policies would better facilitate a financial system more aligned with lending, trust and stability and less towards high-risk activities and leverage via complex products.\nJEL Classification: E50, E51, E52, E58, G20, G21, G24, G28.\nKeywords: Bank Lending, Bank business model, deleveraging, structural policy, unconventional monetary policy, distance to default, spreads, bank separation, GSIFI.","PeriodicalId":444795,"journal":{"name":"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bank lending puzzles\",\"authors\":\"A. Blundell-Wignall, Caroline Roulet\",\"doi\":\"10.1787/fmt-2013-5k40m1nz55wj\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Banks are still dealing with historic losses buried in their balance sheets. As a result, the US economy is picking up only modestly and Europe is sinking further into recession, despite unprecedented low interest rates and policies to compress the term premium. The aim of this study is to explore the business activities of banks, with a special focus on their lending behaviour, and its responsiveness to unconventional monetary policy. The paper shows that deleveraging has been mainly via mark-to-market assets falling in value, and policy is now serving to reflate these assets without a strong impact on lending. A panel regression study shows that GSIFI banks are least responsive to policy. Non-GSIFI banks respond to the lending rate spread to cash rates, the spread between lending rates and the alternative investment in government bonds, and the distance-to-default (the banks solvency). The paper shows that better lending in the USA is a result of safer banks and a better spread to government bonds – yields on the latter are too attractive relative to lending rates in Europe. Finally, the paper comments on the problem of using cyclical tools to address structural problems in banks, and suggests which alternative policies would better facilitate a financial system more aligned with lending, trust and stability and less towards high-risk activities and leverage via complex products.\\nJEL Classification: E50, E51, E52, E58, G20, G21, G24, G28.\\nKeywords: Bank Lending, Bank business model, deleveraging, structural policy, unconventional monetary policy, distance to default, spreads, bank separation, GSIFI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":444795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5k40m1nz55wj\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1787/fmt-2013-5k40m1nz55wj","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

银行仍在处理隐藏在资产负债表中的历史性亏损。其结果是,尽管利率处于前所未有的低位,并出台了压缩期限溢价的政策,但美国经济仅温和复苏,而欧洲正进一步陷入衰退。本研究的目的是探讨银行的业务活动,特别关注银行的贷款行为及其对非常规货币政策的反应。这篇论文表明,去杠杆化主要是通过按市值计价的资产贬值来实现的,目前的政策是在不对贷款产生强烈影响的情况下使这些资产再膨胀。一项面板回归研究表明,GSIFI银行对政策的反应最小。非gsifi银行对贷款利率与现金利率的息差、贷款利率与政府债券替代投资之间的息差以及违约距离(银行偿付能力)做出反应。这篇论文表明,美国贷款的好转是银行更安全以及政府债券利差扩大的结果——相对于欧洲的贷款利率,后者的收益率太有吸引力了。最后,本文对使用周期性工具解决银行结构性问题的问题进行了评论,并提出了哪些替代政策可以更好地促进金融体系更符合贷款、信任和稳定,而不是通过复杂产品进行高风险活动和杠杆化。JEL分类:E50、E51、E52、E58、G20、G21、G24、G28。关键词:银行贷款,银行业务模式,去杠杆,结构性政策,非常规货币政策,违约距离,利差,银行分离,GSIFI
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bank lending puzzles
Banks are still dealing with historic losses buried in their balance sheets. As a result, the US economy is picking up only modestly and Europe is sinking further into recession, despite unprecedented low interest rates and policies to compress the term premium. The aim of this study is to explore the business activities of banks, with a special focus on their lending behaviour, and its responsiveness to unconventional monetary policy. The paper shows that deleveraging has been mainly via mark-to-market assets falling in value, and policy is now serving to reflate these assets without a strong impact on lending. A panel regression study shows that GSIFI banks are least responsive to policy. Non-GSIFI banks respond to the lending rate spread to cash rates, the spread between lending rates and the alternative investment in government bonds, and the distance-to-default (the banks solvency). The paper shows that better lending in the USA is a result of safer banks and a better spread to government bonds – yields on the latter are too attractive relative to lending rates in Europe. Finally, the paper comments on the problem of using cyclical tools to address structural problems in banks, and suggests which alternative policies would better facilitate a financial system more aligned with lending, trust and stability and less towards high-risk activities and leverage via complex products. JEL Classification: E50, E51, E52, E58, G20, G21, G24, G28. Keywords: Bank Lending, Bank business model, deleveraging, structural policy, unconventional monetary policy, distance to default, spreads, bank separation, GSIFI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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