MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4308531665 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15110514

Corporate Governance and Financial Stability: The Case of Commercial Banks in Vietnam

2022· article· en· W4308531665 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thi Nhu Quynh Nguyen, Hoang Anh Le, Dinh Luan Le

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessVietnameseAccountingShareholderStability (learning theory)Financial systemFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bank stability is a goal that bank managers aim for in addition to the goal of maximizing shareholder value. To achieve this goal, commercial banks have applied various solutions, including corporate governance because corporate governance plays an important role in the business activities of an enterprise in general as well as in that of a commercial bank in particular. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of corporate governance on the stabilities of Vietnamese commercial banks in the period from 2009 to 2020. Using hand-collected data from 25 commercial banks in Vietnam, by system GMM estimation and the Bayesian Mixed-Effects approach, the paper identifies the characteristics of corporate governance affecting bank stability. Board size, women board members, and board members’ education have a positive impact, and dependent board and foreign board members have a negative impact on bank stability. Our findings show important evidence for an emerging country, such as Vietnam. From the empirical results, the authors suggest several recommendations to maintain and enhance bank stability in the future time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicCorporate Finance and Governance→French-language works237,207→