Corporate Governance, Bank Stability and Risk-Taking: Differences Between Conventional and Islamic Banks
Ghaithaa El Mokdad & Ali Awdeh
What the paper says
Abstract This study aims to detect the impact of the corporate governance structures on MENA banks’ stability and risk-taking. In particular, it aims at considering if bank type (conventional or Islamic) is a major determinant of the relationship between corporate governance, bank stability and risk-taking. The research adopts panel data econometrics on a sample containing the largest 100 MENA banks operating between 2011 and 2021. The empirical estimations examine the impact of board size, board independence, board gender diversity, role duality, the existence of risk, governance and nomination and remuneration committees as well as ownership blockholdings, on bank Z-scores and NPL ratios. The empirical results show that the exploited variables impact conventional and Islamic banks stability and risk differently. For instance, a larger board size has a positive effect on conventional bank stability, while it is irrelevant for Islamic banks. For role duality, the opposite findings have been observed. The risk committee plays an important role in Islamic banks risk mitigation, unlike the case of conventional banks. Finally, the existence of blockholdings poses considerable risk for conventional banks only.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.