Effects of Deposit Insurance on Self-Discipline of Bank Franchise Value

Yaozong  Zhao

doi:10.4236/ajibm.2017.73014

Yaozong Zhao

Abstract: Foreign research has shown that the bank franchise value is the important mechanism of the bank’s risk self-discipline. However, the relationship between the franchise value and the risk behavior of our bank must be based on our special financial background. Before the implementation of explicit deposit insurance system in China, there has been an implicit deposit insurance system guaranteed by the government. The traditional literature suggests that the implicit deposit insurance system provides a strong guarantee for commercial banks, which may weaken the risk discipline effect of the bank’s franchise value, and the reasonable explicit deposit insurance system is superior to the implicit deposit insurance system. In the financial context of the explicit deposit insurance system, the self-discipline effect of the franchise value will be repaired. Based on the reality of establishing an explicit deposit insurance system in China, this paper uses the Tobin Q value to measure the franchise value of 16 listed banks in China. The relationship between the franchise value and risk of bank before and after the introduction of explicit deposit insurance is studied by using panel data model. The results show that before the implementation of the explicit deposit insurance system, the self-discipline effect of the franchise value is completely ineffective in the context of the government-guaranteed implicit deposit insurance system. The cross-item coefficient of the explicit deposit insurance system and the franchise value is significantly negative. It shows that the implementation of the explicit deposit insurance system has played a role in restoring the self-discipline effect of the bank’s franchise value.

Keywords: Bank’s Franchise Value, Explicit Deposit Insurance System, Implicit Deposit Insurance System, Listed Bank, Risk

Cite this paper: Zhao, Y. (2017) Effects of Deposit Insurance on Self-Discipline of Bank Franchise Value. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 7, 179-190. doi: 10.4236/ajibm.2017.73014.

References

[1] Diamond, R. (1966) Present Models That Formalize a Bank’s Franchise Value and Its Liquidity and Fragility Implications. Journal of Economics and Business, No. 76, 542-593.

[2] Marcus, A.J. (1984) Deregulation and Bank Financial Policy. Journal of Banking and Finance, 8, 557-565.

[3] Keeley, M.C. (1990) Deposit Insurance, Risk, and Market Power in Banking. The American Economic Review, 80, 1183-1200.

[4] Demsetz, R.S., Saidenberg, M.R. and Strahan, P.E. (1996) Banks with Something to Lose: The Disciplinary Role of Franchise Value. Economic Policy Review, 2, 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1028769

[5] Stolz, S.M. (2007) Bank Capital and Risk-Taking: The Impact of Capital Regulation, Charter Value, and the Business Cycle. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

[6] Ghosh, S. (2009) Charter Value and Risk-Taking: Evidence from Indian Banks. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 14, 270-286.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860902975606

[7] Park, S. (1997) Risk-Taking Behavior of Banks under Regulation. Journal of Banking and Finance, 21, 491-507.

[8] Fisher, K.P., Gueyie, J.P. and Ortiz, E. (2001) Charter Value and Commercial Banks’ Risk-Taking in the NAFTA Countries. The International Journal of Finance, 13, 2027.

[9] Lu, Q. (2002) Bank’s Concession Value Analysis and Policy Implications. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3, 1-6.

[10] Yuan, S. (2005) Comparison of the Concession Value between China and America. Rural Finance Research, 5, 28-30.

[11] Ma, X. and Ou, Y. (2007) A Comparative Study on the Influencing Factors of the Concession Value of Commercial Banks between China and the United States. Finance Research, 4, 53-71.

[12] Li, Y. and Han, L. (2006) Franchise Value and Risk Behavior of China’s Listed Banks. Finance Research, 12, 82-91.

[13] Li, Y. and Han, L. (2008) Franchise Value, Implicit Insurance and Risks—An Empirical Analysis of China’s Banking Industry. Journal of Financial Research, 1, 76-87.

[14] Wei, H. and Han, L. (2011) The Self-Regulatory Effect of Franchise Value under Implicit Insurance. Shandong Social Sciences, 6, 57-60.

[15] Sun, B. and Huang, H. (2010) The Self-Discipline Effect of the Privilege of China’s Listed Banks. Finance Forum, 1, 5-9.

[16] Qu, H. and Zhang, X. (2012) A Study on the Relationship between the Concession Value and the Bank’s Robustness—Based on the Empirical Test of Chinese and American Listed Banks. Economic and Management Review, 4, 92-98.

[17] Zhang, Y. (2006) The Necessity and Feasibility Analysis of Implementing Dominant Deposit Insurance System. Hainan Finance, 5, 23-25.

[18] Li, Y. (2006) Privileges of Chinese Commercial Banks: 1994-2003. Shanghai Finance, 2, 26-30.

[19] Qu, H. (2011) An Empirical Study on the Relationship between the Concession Value of Chinese Listed Banks and the Bank’s Robustness. Statistics and Information Forum, 26, 72-77.

[20] Zhu, B. and Yang, W. (2016) Does Non-Interest Income Reduce the Systemic Risk of Banks?—View from Scale Heterogeneity. Banking Research, 4, 62-73.

[21] Moore, K. and Zhou, C. (2013) “Too Big to Fail” or “Too Non-Traditional to Fail”? The Determinants of Banks’ Systemic Importance. Available at SSRN 1993059.