IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finsta/v84y2026ics1572308926000525.html

Does liquidity regulation reduce bank and systemic risk? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Ananou, Foly
  • Chronopoulos, Dimitris K.
  • Tarazi, Amine
  • Wilson, John O.S.

Abstract

This study uses a quasi-natural experimental research design exploiting the Dutch Liquidity Balance Rule (LBR) to evaluate the impacts of liquidity regulation on bank-level stability and systemic risk. Our findings show that following the introduction of the LBR, the stability of Dutch banks increases significantly relative to counterparts in neighboring countries unaffected by the regulation. The observed reduction in risk stems from improved capitalization and reduced leverage, which contribute to greater financial stability. Systemic risk also decreases. Dutch banks' vulnerability to systemic stress declines significantly, along with expected capital shortfalls, and their potential to transmit distress through the financial system diminishes. Our findings have relevance for policymakers tasked with implementing and monitoring the impacts of similar forms of liquidity regulation (such as bank liquidity coverage ratios) post global financial crisis. Specifically, adding liquidity regulation to pre-existing regulations is successful in mitigating risks that could propagate beyond the financial sector, and disrupt the real economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ananou, Foly & Chronopoulos, Dimitris K. & Tarazi, Amine & Wilson, John O.S., 2026. "Does liquidity regulation reduce bank and systemic risk? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:finsta:v:84:y:2026:i:c:s1572308926000525
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jfs.2026.101550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1572308926000525
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jfs.2026.101550?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:finsta:v:84:y:2026:i:c:s1572308926000525. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jfstabil .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.