Recognizing nonmonotonicity of exogenous determinants in a stochastic profit efficiency framework: have banks overinvested in IT capital?

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore and evaluate potential nonmonotonicity in the determinants of profit efficiency, specifically IT and R&D investments in the Indian commercial banking sector.Design/methodology/approachThe study employs an alternative stochastic profit efficiency framework and introduces nonmonotonic effects by parameterizing the location and scale parameters of the inefficiency component on an unbalanced panel data set of 72 commercial banks in the 2008–2019 period. Marginal effects across quartiles are calculated using a bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap procedure of 500 simulations. The study disaggregates across ownership and size for gauging the impact of structure on the associations between determinants of profit efficiency.FindingsThe study partially rejects the productivity paradox as it discovers a negative association of IT and R&D with profit inefficiency. However, the observed nonmonotonicity of IT is of significance for bank managers, as the study concludes that overinvestment in IT is detrimental to a bank’s profit-maximizing interests. Further, bank size, loan default and credit risk depict a nonmonotonic relationship across the sample with large banks, high NPAs and high credit risk associated with reducing profit efficiency. In addition, higher margins and greater diversification are related positively to efficiency, and banks with cost-heavy structures or having high liquidity risk associated negatively with efficiency.Originality/valueTo the best knowledge of the authors, the study is perhaps the first to acknowledge and incorporate nonmonotonic associations of IT investments amidst other exogenous determinants under a stochastic profit efficiency framework.

Quantitative Easing, Collateral Constraints, and Financial Spillovers

The steady application of quantitative easing (QE ) has been followed by big and nonmonotonic effects on international asset prices and capital flows. We rationalize these observations in a model in which a central bank buys domestic assets that serve as the best collateral for investors worldwide. The crucial insight is that domestic private agents adjust their portfolios of domestic and foreign assets in different ways to offset QE, conditional on whether they are (i) fully leveraged, (ii ) partially leveraged, or (iii) unleveraged. These portfolio shifts can diminish or even reverse the impact of ever-larger QE interventions on asset prices. (JEL E31, E32, E43, E44, E52, E58, F34)

RESPONDING TO THE INFLATION TAX

We adopt mechanism design to study the effects of inflation on output, trade, and capital accumulation. Our theory captures multiple channels for individuals to respond to inflation: search intensity, market participation, and substitution between money and a higher return asset. We characterize constrained efficient allocations and show inflation has nonmonotonic effects on the frequency of trades (extensive margin) and the total quantity traded (intensive margin). The model features monetary superneutrality for low inflation rates, nonlinearities in trading frequencies, and substitution of money for capital for higher inflation rates. While these effects are difficult to capture in previous models, we show how they are intimately related by all being features of an optimal trading mechanism.

Financial Networks and Contagion

We study cascades of failures in a network of interdependent financial organizations: how discontinuous changes in asset values (e.g., defaults and shutdowns) trigger further failures, and how this depends on network structure. Integration (greater dependence on counterparties) and diversification (more counterparties per organization) have different, nonmonotonic effects on the extent of cascades. Diversification connects the network initially, permitting cascades to travel; but as it increases further, organizations are better insured against one another's failures. Integration also faces trade-offs: increased dependence on other organizations versus less sensitivity to own investments. Finally, we illustrate the model with data on European debt cross-holdings. (JEL D85, F15, F34, F36, F65, G15, G32, G33, G38)