Banking in the First Quarter of the Twenty-First Century in Historical Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This final chapter of the fourth edition of the Oxford Handbook of Banking provides a long-term analysis of the 2000–2024 era that changed banking to such an extent that it would be unrecognizable beforehand. Three relatively exogenous sets of factors—comprising two types of technological advances and extensive banking deregulations implemented prior to the era—combined to largely transform banking practice, policy, and research. We discuss such issues and place them into the historical context of eras of the twentieth century, 1901–1933, 1934–1979, and 1980–1999, displaying similar patterns in which relatively exogenous factors largely endogenously altered the banking industry and led to new policy directions and research agendas. Outcomes in each era also appear to help set up the transformations that take place in the following era. We also look ahead to the remainder of the twenty-first century to project what might occur. We ask others to join in a more widespread investigation of a larger set of topics, periods, and geographies than space constraints allow here. This may allow for a more holistic view of the evolution of banking.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".