On the Entry of Foreign Banks: The Jordanian Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relative to the numerous papers which examine the performance of banks, one of the most important key features of the evolution of foreign direct investment (FDI) flows in recent years has been the increasing proportion of FDI in the service (including banking) industry. This is why the financial economics and finance literatures include a growing number of researches that examine the effect of the entry of foreign banks on domestic bank's performance in terms of, for example, their net interest margin and competition. This paper analyzes the issues of net interest margin and competition in the Jordanian banking system during the time period from 2000 to 2010. In more specific terms, the paper examines the impact of the entry of foreign banks on the behavior of bank spreads and the extent of competition. Using a panel of bank-level data, the results indicate that while well-known determinants of net interest margin are appropriate to the Jordanian scene, the effect of the entry of foreign banks on the cost of financial intermediation has not been positive. In addition, based on a non-structural measure of competition (H-statistic), the results indicate that foreign banks have not led to any significant improvement in the monopolistic competition condition that prevails in the Jordanian banking sector.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".