Cros-border Capital Flow and the Systemic Risk of Commercial Banks

Authors

  • XIE Xianjun School of Government Management, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
  • YU Junli China Emerging Industry Innovation Research Center, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20069/mnsy7a90

Keywords:

cros-border capital flows, the systemic risk of commercial banks, credit scale of banks, credit concentration of banks

Abstract

Leveraging cross-border capital to increase capital is a crucial strategy for fostering the high-quality development of China’s economy. However, it is imperative to carefully consider the impact of such capital flows on the systemic risk of commercial banks. This study delves into the nuanced relationship between cross-border capital flows and the stability of commercial banks, offering essential insights on how to cope with such impacts while advancing financial openness and safeguarding China’s financial stability and development. Equally important is the dual circulation of domestic and international economic activities, which mutually reinforce one another. The existing body of research lacks a unified understanding of how cross-border capital flows affect the systemic risk of commercial banks. A notable gap remains in exploring this relationship from the perspective of cross-border capital flow intensity. Specifically, most extant research relies on empirical verification using macro-level monthly data and cross-border panel data. However, the absence of comprehensive and in-depth micro-level empirical evidence has resulted in inconsistent conclusions and a limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms. This paper employs China’s international balance of payments to quantify cross-border capital flow intensity, applying the Conditional Value at Risk (CoVaR) method to calculate the systemic risk of commercial banks. The empirical findings reveal that heightened cross-border capital flow intensity significantly diminishes systemic risk. In particular, intensified flows of securities investment capital and other forms of investment capital substantially reduce systemic risk. Although the intensity of direct investment capital flows also contributes to lowering systemic risk, the effect is not statistically significant. Furthermore, the study identifies bank credit scale and credit concentration as pivotal channels through which cross-border capital flows impact systemic risk. Increasing the intensity of cross-border capital flows helps expand banks’ credit scale and reduce credit concentration, which in turn lowers systemic risk. The effective transmission channel can be summarized as: cross-border capital flow intensity → credit scale/credit concentration → systemic risk of commercial banks. Compared with large state-owned banks, small and medium-sized banks exhibit a greater capacity to absorb cross-border capital, resulting in a more pronounced reduction in systemic risk. This paper contributes to existing research in two key dimensions. First, it investigates the theoretical mechanisms through which cross-border capital flow intensity influences systemic risk in commercial banks, expanding upon prior literature by examining the role of different capital flow structures. Second, it introduces a novel measure—capital flow intensity and structure—rather than focusing solely on the total volume of cross-border capital flows. Empirical analysis reveals the varying impacts of flow intensity and its structural components on systemic risk.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] 白雪梅, 石大龙. 中国金融体系的系统性风险度量 [J]. 国际金融研究, 2014(6):75-85.

[2] 张明, 刘瑶. 经常账户恶化是否会加大国内资产价格波动: 基于G20数据的作用机制及时变效应研究 [J]. 国际金融研究, 2021(5):34-43.

[3] Kalemli-Ozcans, Luttinie, Sorensen B. Debt crises and risk-sharing: the role of markets versus sovereigns [J]. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 2014, 116(1):253-276.

[4] 张荣峰. 国际资本流动与银行稳定 [J]. 国际金融研究, 2007(2):66-74.

[5] 钟红, 刘家琳. 债务型资本流动对主权债务违约风险影响研究 [J]. 国际金融研究, 2021(4):43-56.

[6] Maddalonia, Peydro J. L. Monetary policy, macroprudential policy and banking stability: evidence from the Euro area [J]. International Journal of Central Banking, 2013, 9(1):121-169.

[7] 王小华, 邓晓雯, 周海洋. 金融科技对商业银行经营绩效的影响: 促进还是抑制? [J]. 改革, 2022(8):141-155.

[8] Gourincah S. P. O., Jeanne O. The elusive gains from international financial integration [J]. The Review of Economic Studies, 2006, 73(3):715-741.

[9] 刘仁伍, 刘华, 黄礼健. 新兴市场国家的国际资本流动与双危机模型扩展 [J]. 金融研究, 2008(4):37-54.

[10] 高志勇, 刘赟. 转型经济国家资本流动与银行稳定关系的实证研究: 基于中东欧8国面板数据的分析 [J]. 国际贸易问题, 2010(7):48-54.

[11] 马宇, 王红平. 资本流动突停能引发银行危机吗: 基于61个新兴市场国家样本的实证分析 [J]. 经济经纬, 2018(3):75-81.

[12] 顾海峰, 卞雨晨. 跨境资本流动、资产价格与银行流动性风险: 货币政策不确定性与银行业竞争的调节作用 [J]. 财经科学, 2020(12):13-27.

[13] 武力超, 施桑桑, 韩华桂, 等. 外商直接投资、财政政策波动与地区金融生态环境 [J]. 金融论坛, 2018(2):20-34.

[14] 黄新飞, 刘爽. 全球流动性冲击下双向直接投资与经济复苏: 基于DSGE模型的分析 [J]. 中山大学学报(社会科学版), 2022(2):169-181.

[15] 才国伟, 杨豪. 外商直接投资能否改善中国要素市场扭曲 [J]. 中国工业经济, 2019(10):42-60.

[16] 朱孟楠, 陈冲. 跨境资本流动对中美国际收支失衡的影响: 基于对外金融资产负债可持续约束视角 [J]. 国际贸易问题, 2020(11):159-174.

[17] 史恩义, 张燕青. OFDI影响母国金融发展的机理及效应研究: 基于双重路径视角 [J]. 国际商务(对外经济贸易大学学报), 2019(3):97-111.

[18] 伦晓波, 杨竹莘, 李欣. 所有制、对外直接投资与融资约束: 基于金融资源错配视角的实证分析 [J]. 世界经济研究, 2018(6):83-93.

[19] Melitz M. J. The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity [J]. Econometrica, 2003, 71:1695-1725.

[20] 宫晓莉, 熊熊. 波动溢出网络视角的金融风险传染研究 [J]. 金融研究, 2020(5):39-58.

[21] 郭品, 沈悦. 互联网金融加重了商业银行的风险承担吗: 来自中国银行业的经验证据 [J]. 南开经济研究, 2015(4):80-97.

[22] 张琳, 廉永辉, 方意. 政策连续性与商业银行系统性风险 [J]. 金融研究, 2022(5):95-113.

[23] 方意. 货币政策与房地产价格冲击下的银行风险承担分析 [J]. 世界经济, 2015(7):73-98.

[24] 郭凤娟, 丁剑平. 人民币国际化、汇率与跨境资本流动互动关系研究 [J]. 当代经济科学, 2023(2):1-12.

[25] 刚健华, 赵扬, 高翔. 短期跨境资本流动、金融市场与系统性风险 [J]. 经济理论与经济管理, 2018(4):98-112.

[26] Brownlees C., Engle R. S. SRISK: a conditional capital shortfall measure of systemic risk [J]. Review of Finance and Studies, 2017, 30(1):48-79.

[27] Brownlees C., Engle R., Kelly B. A practical guide to volatility forecasting through calm and storm [J]. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2012, 14(2):3-22.

[28] Acharya V. V., Pedersen L. H., Philippon T., et al. Measuring systemic risk [J]. Review of Financial Studies, 2017, 30(1):2-47.

Downloads

Published

2024-01-12

How to Cite

Cros-border Capital Flow and the Systemic Risk of Commercial Banks. (2024). Modern Economic Science, 46(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.20069/mnsy7a90

Similar Articles

1-10 of 39

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.