{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01705237515225335, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012180267965895249, 'mean_word_length': 5.682926829268292, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Regulations and productivity growth in banking

This paper examines the relationship between the regulatory and supervision framework and the productivity of banks in 22 countries over the period 1999-2006. We follow a semi-parametric two-step approach that combines Malmquist index estimates with bootstrap regressions. The results indicate that regulations and incentives that promote private monitoring have a positive impact on productivity. Restrictions on banks’ activities relating to their involvement in securities, insurance, real estate and ownership of non-financial firms also have a positive impact. However, regulations relating to the first and second pillars of Basel II, namely capital requirements and official supervisory power do not appear to have a statistically significant impact on productivity.