Market Discipline in Post- Transformation Era: A Study on Banking Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to investigate the existence of Market Discipline in the Indian commercial banks over the period 2001-2008 i.e., 7 years. This period is characterized by second round of banking sector reform as suggested by Narsimham Committee for banking restructuring and market discipline. A total of 63 scheduled commercial banks were taken as the sample size which included 27 public sector banks, 23 private banks and 13 foreign banks. Two dependent variables viz. total deposits held by banks and interest paid on deposits to total deposit ratio are considered in this study. We hypothesize that the dependent variables in this study, which signifies the existence or otherwise of market discipline depends on three sets of variables: a) bank-specific; b) banking industry level; and c) macroeconomic. The findings show that while bank-specific factors, and in particular, policy variables, in addition to bank-specific indicators tend to be dominant in case of private banks. For foreign banks, the macroeconomic conditions tend to overwhelm bank-specific factors in explaining behavior of depositors. This provides testimony of market discipline in the banking sector in India.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".