IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Evaluating the influence of the internal ratings-based approach on bank lending in Japan

Listed author(s):
  • Shin Fukuda


    (Meiji University)

Registered author(s):

    The capital adequacy requirement of banks shifted in March, 2007 from Basel I to Basel II. In Basel II, exact measurement of credit risk is adopted, and banks choose between a standardized approach (SA) and an internal ratings-based approach (IRBA). In general, the IRBA is a more risk-sensitive capital requirement measurement than the SA and Basel I. Theoretical modeling in related literatures implies that since the IRBA depends on the probability of default, a downturn implies a higher capital requirement, meaning that the IRBA is pro-cyclical to the business cycle. The purpose of this paper is to verify the effects of the IRBA on bank lending through empirical analysis. Although the empirical analysis here cannot confirm the pro-cyclicality of the IRBA, it does allow the proposal of a benchmark for the effects of this approach. The effect we estimate is the Average Treatment Effect on the Treated (ATT), and the estimation method adopted is difference-in-difference propensity score matching (DID-PSM). Using this method, we can confirm the real effects of the IRBA. The results are that in 2006-2007 when bank balance-sheets were favorable, the ATT are negative, but all these are insignificant, on the other hand, in 2006-2008 when the balance-sheets were infuluenced by the subprime-loan crisis, the ATT are negative and significant, and smaller than it in 2006-2008. Thus, we cannot say that the IRBA has the pro-cyclicality exactly.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by AccessEcon in its journal Economics Bulletin.

    Volume (Year): 30 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 2842-2855

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-10-00161
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-10-00161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (John P. Conley)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.