MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162363492

The euro area crisis and cross-border bank lending to emerging markets 1

2012· article· en· W2162363492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stefan Avdjiev, Zsolt Kuti

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)International bankingEmerging marketsBusinessPanel dataFinancial systemFinancial crisisBank creditEconomicsMonetary economicsFinanceGeographyEconometricsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-border bank lending to emerging markets dropped sharply in the second half of 2011 as the euro area crisis intensified. We use the BIS international banking statistics to identify the key drivers of this decline. Our results indicate that the latest contraction in cross-border bank lending was largely linked to the deteriorating health of euro area banks. We answer these questions by using the BIS international banking statistics (IBS) in a panel regression framework. The analysis covers quarterly cross-border bank lending data for 40 EMEs between the third quarter of 2005 and the second quarter of 2012. We develop a new methodology which combines information from the two main BIS IBS data sets. This novel approach is the first to simultaneously use actual exchange rate-adjusted cross-border lending flows to EMEs and trace these flows to individual home country banking systems. We use the panel regression results to decompose the quarterly fluctuations in cross-border lending to EMEs into components attributable to EME credit demand, EME country risk and the health of the banking systems that supply the cross- border credit. Our results indicate that home country factors related to the health of advanced economy banks played a crucial role during the late 2011 lending

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207