DETERMINATION OF SIFIs (SYSTEMATICALLY IMPORTANT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS) AMONG INDONESIAN BANKS USING NETWORK ANALYSIS APPROACH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jiae.2017.007.02.3Keywords:
Interconnectedness, Systemic risk, Network centrality, Network analysis, SIFI, Banking crisisAbstract
This study aims to measuring systemic risks using network analysis method to obtain the SIFI rating of Indonesian banks. We analyze the systemic risk implied in the Indonesian interbank network during the period from 2011 through 2015 based on various network measures such degree centrality and betweenness centrality. The main findings are as follows: First, interconnectedness in the interbank market increased. However, a significantly different condition was found in 2013, in which the interconnectedness in the interbank market went downwards compared to the previous year. Second, the degree centrality score showed that government-owned and national private banks tend to be in-degree while foreign private banks tend to be out-degree. Third, there was no bank that consistently continued to have a high betweeness centrality score during the study period.
References
Acharya, V.V. (2009). A theory of systemic risk and design of prudential bank regulation. Journal of Financial Stability, 5, 224–255.
Acharya, V.V., Lasse H.P., Thomas, P. & Matthew R. (2010). Measuring Sys-temic Risk. New York University Stern School of Business.
Billio, M., Mila G., Andrew W. Lo, & Loriana P. (2012). Econometric measures of connectedness and systemic risk in the finance and insurance sectors. Journal of Financial Economics, 104, 535–559.
Bluhm, M. & Krahnen Jan P. (2014). Systemic risk in an interconnected banking system with endogenous asset markets. Journal of Financial Stability, 13, 75-94.
Bongini, P., Laura N. & Matteo P. (2015). The importance of being systemically important financial institutions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 50, 562–574.
Boyd, John H. & Amanda Heitz. (2016). The social costs and benefits of too-big-to-fail banks: A ‘‘bounding†exercise. Journal of Banking and Finance, 68, 251–265.
Brunnermeier, M. (2009). The Fundamental Principles of Financial Regulation. Geneva Reports on the World Economy, 11.
Cole, Ethan Cohen., Eleonora P. & Yves Zenou. (2013). Systemic Risk and Network Formation in the Interbank Market. American Economic Association.
De Bandth, O. & Philipp H. (2000). Systemic Risk: A Survey. European Central Bank Working Paper, 35.
Georg, Co-Pierre. (2013). The effect of the interbank network structure on contagion and common shocks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37, 2216–2228.
Hattori, M. & Yuko S. (2007). Developments in a cross-border bank exposure network. Committee on the Global Financial System Publications, 29, 16–31.
Kanno, M. (2015). Assessing systemic risk using interbank exposures in the global banking system. Journal of Financial Stability, 20, 105–130.
Krause, A. & Simone G. (2012). Interbank lending and the spread of bank failures: A network model of systemic risk. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83, 583–608.
Lee, Seung H. (2013). Systemic liquidity shortages and interbank network structures. Journal of Financial Stability, 9, 1–12.
Markose, Sheri M. (2012). Systemic Risk from Global Financial Derivatives: A Network Analysis of Contagion and Its Mitigation with Super-Spreader Tax. IMF Working Paper.
Minoiu, C. & Javier A. R. (2013). A network analysis of global banking: 1978–2010. Journal of Financial Stability, 9, 168– 184.
Paltalidis, N., Dimitrios G., Renatas K. & Yiannis K. (2015). Transmission channels of systemic risk and contagion in the European financial network. Journal of Banking and Finance, 61, S36–S52.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of Indonesian Applied Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
