The Probability that Current Imbalances and Trade Openness May Trigger Systemic Risks in the Banking Sector?

Abstract

With the increase in international trade and liberalization, financial and real transactions between countries have gained significant momentum. Increasing real flows and international connections have increased the volume of goods and services production, reduced investors’ risks, and provided many benefits, such as diversification and easy access to needed funds. However, this situation has become a structural problem of the current account deficits in many countries, especially Turkey. In this study, it has been examined how and to what extent the increasing international connections and current account deficits affect the systemic risks of banks. For this purpose, the period between 2006 and 2019 of nine banks operating in Turkey was analyzed by applying the PMG-ARDL method proposed by Pesaran et al. (1999). The results showed that increasing current account deficits had a positive impact on systemic risks. Trade openness has been found to reduce systemic risks. According to the analysis results, increasing current account deficits increases the systemic risk levels of banks and increases the possible instability of the financial system. This finding has shown that the current account deficit is not only a macroeconomic problem but also a serious problem for the Turkish Banking Sector and the financial sector. Increasing current account imbalances trigger systemic risks of banks. That the increasing current account deficits have reached top levels increases the potential of the Turkish Financial System to enter instability. This also shows that current account deficits produce a transmission mechanism that can cause financial crises over systemic risks. Similarly, the impact of trade openness, which is an indicator of increasing international trade and connections, on systemic risks is positively directional and meaningful.

Keywords

• Current Account Deficit
• Trade Openness
• Systemic Risks
• Macroeconomics

Cari Dengesizlikler ve Ticari Serbestleşmenin Bankacılık Sektöründeki Sistemik Riskleri Tetikleyebilme İhtimali

Öz

Uluslararası ticaretin ve serbestleşmenin artmasıyla birlikte ülkeler arasındaki finansal ve reel işlemler önemli bir ivme kazanmıştır. Artan reel akımlar ve uluslararası bağlantılar, mal ve hizmet üretim hacmini arttırmış, yatırımcıların risklerini azaltmış, çeşitlendirme ve ihtiyaç duyulan fonlara kolay erişim gibi birçok fayda sağlamıştır. Bununla birlikte, bu durum Türkiye başta olmak üzere birçok ülkede cari açıkları yapısal bir sorun haline getirmiştir. Bu araştırmada artan uluslararası bağlantıların ve cari açıkların bankaların sistemik risklerini ne yönde ve ölçüde etkilediği incelenmiştir. Bu amaçla Türkiye’de faaliyet gösteren dokuz bankanın 2006-2019 dönemi Pesaran vd. (1999) tarafından geliştirilen PMG-ARDL yöntemi uygulanarak analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre cari açıkların artması bankaların sistemik risk düzeylerini arttırarak, finansal sistemin olası istikrarsızlığını yükseltmektedir. Bu bulgu cari açığın yalnız bir makroekonomik sorun olmadığını, aynı zamanda Türk Banacılık Sektörü ve finansal kesim için de ciddi bir problem olduğunu göstermiştir. Cari dengesizliklerin artması bankaların sistemik risklerini tetiklemektedir. Artan cari açıkların çok yüksek boyutlara ulaşması, Türk Finansal Sisteminin istikrarsızlığa girme potansiyelini arttırmaktadır. Bu, aynı zamanda cari açıkların sistemik riskler üzerinden finansal krizlere neden olabilecek bir iletim mekanizması ürettiğini göstermektedir. Benzer şekilde, uluslararası ticaretin ve bağlantıların artmasının göstergesi olan ticari serbestliğin sistemik riskler üzerindeki etkisi pozitif yönlü ve anlamlıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ticari Serbestleşme
• Sistemik Riskler
• Makroekonomi

References

1. Acharya, V. V., Pedersen, L. H., Philippon, T., & Richardson, M. P. (2010). Measuring systemic risk, 1-46. http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~lpederse/papers/MeasuringSystemicRisk.pdf/ Erişim Tarihi: 20.10.2020
2. Adedoyin, F. F., Gumede, M. I., Bekun, F. V., Etokakpan, M. U. & Lobre-Lorente, D. (2020). Modelling coal rent, economic growth and CO2 emissions: Does regulatory quality matter in BRICS economies? Science of the Total Environment, 710, 136284, 1-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136284
3. Adrian, T. ve Brunnermeier, M. K. (2011). CoVaR, NBER, Working Paper, 17454, 1-43.
4. Akyol, H. (2020). Politik belirsizlikler altında Türk bankalarının risk alma davranışlarının belirlenmesi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2), 61-78. DOI: iibfdkastamonu.797633
5. Alsaleh, M. & Abdul-Rahim, A. S. (2019). Financial development and bioenergy consumption in the EU28 region: Evidence from panel auto-regressive distributed lag bound approach. Resources, 8(44), 1-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8010044
6. Angelini, E. C., & Farina, F. (2012). Current account ımbalances and systemic risk within a monetary union. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83, 647– 656.
7. Alola, A. A., Bekun, F. V., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Dynamic ımpact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 685, 702–709. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.139
8. Ashraf, B. N., Arshad, S., &Yan, L. (2017). Trade openness and bank risk-taking behavior: evidence from emerging economies. J. Risk Financial Manag., 10, 15, 1-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm10030015

9. Asteriou, D., Pilbeam, K., & Pratiwi, C. E. (2020). Public debt and economic growth: panel data evidence for asian countries. Journal of Economics and Finance, 1-18. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12197-020-09515-7
10. Bank for International Settlements (2011). 81st Annual report. basel, https://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2011e.pdf. Erişim Tarihi: 10.09.2020
11. Boissay, F. (2011). Financial ımbalances and financial fragility. European Central Bank, Working Paper Series, 1317, 1-36.
12. Brownlees, C. T., & Engle, R. F. (2012). Volatility, correlation and tails for systemic risk measurement, SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 1611229. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.
13. Brownlees, C., & Engle, R. F. (2017). SRISK: A conditional capital shortfall measure of systemic risk. The Review of Financial Studies, 30 (1), 48-79.
14. Caballero, J., & Hale, G. (2016). Bank linkages and ınternational trade. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Working Paper Series, 2013-14, 1-40.
15. Cauwenberge, A. V., Vancauteren, M., Breakers, R., & Vandemaele, S. (2019). International trade, foreign direct ınvestments, and firms’ systemic risk: Evidence from the Netherlands. Economic Modelling, 81, 361–386. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.07.001
16. Hanh, P. T. H. (2010). Financial development, financial openness and trade openness: New evidence. FIW Working Paper, 60, FIW- Research Centre International Economics, Vienna, 1-31.
17. Hossain, S. A., Moudud-Ul-Huq, S., & Kader, M. B. (2020). Impact of trade openness on bank risk-taking behavior: Evidence from a developing country. Cogent Economics & Finance, 8(1), 1-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2020.1765468
18. Kaat, T., Marcel, D., & Dinger, V. (2015). Global ımbalances and bank risk-taking. Ökonomische Entwicklung -Theorie und Politik, Session: Credit and Liquidity Risks in Financially Integrated Markets: Policy Implications and Real Effects, A02-V2, 1-37.
19. Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90, 1-44.
20. Kim, D. H., Lin, S. C., & Suen, Y. B. (2010). Are financial development and trade openness complements or substitutes? Southern Economic Journal, Jan., 76(3), 827-845.
21. Niepmann, F., & Schmidt-Eisenlohr, T. (2014). International trade, risk, and the role of banks. Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports, 633, 1-69.
22. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. P. (1999). Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446), 621-634.
23. University of New York (V-LAB). https://vlab.stern.nyu.edu/ Erişim Tarihi:24.01.2021 World Bank. Indicators. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators. Erişim Tarihi: 10.09.2020