Banking Industry Consolidation: Past Changes and Implications for the Future

Because there was a 25 percent reduction in the number of banks between 1980 and 1993, the popular impression has been one of a "shrinking" banking industry. Daniel Nolle challenges this view by dissecting the complexity of banking consolidation, particularly given the radical structural changes in commercial banking since 1980. While increased consolidation can be accounted for by heightened competitive pressures that force banks to look for cost savings, greater revenues, or quality improvements via mergers, it has also been stimulated by recent changes in state laws that restricted geographic expansion of banking. The data shows that from 1980 to 1993, 5,202 banks disappeared through mergers, which was three and one-half times the 1,456 banks that failed. The majority of mergers were "intramergers" (within the same holding company), but the number of "intermergers" (between unafiliated banks) has also risen over the past several years. It is Nolle's conclusion that a review of the data on nation-wide trends in banking company structure reveals a complex story I which the distinction between OSMBHCs and MSMBHCs is significant. The whole question of what form of corporate organization banking companies choose is complicated by differences in state banking laws, differences in interstate banking laws, and differences in the pace at which those laws have been changed over this period of time. Such consolidation is expected to continue, especially given increased competition and an expansion of geographic powers. As the twenty-first century approaches, we can expect there to be thousands of banks and thousands of bank holding companies.

Collective Particle Flow through Random Media

A simple model for the nonlinear collective transport of interacting particles in a random medium with strong disorder is introduced and analyzed. A finite threshold for the driving force divides the behavior into two regimes characterized by the presence or absence of a steady-state particle current. Below this threshold, transient motion is found in response to an increase in the force, while above threshold the flow approaches a steady state with motion only on a network of channels which is sparse near threshold. Some of the critical behavior near threshold is analyzed via mean field theory, and analytic results on the statistics of the moving phase are derived. Many of the results should apply, at least qualitatively, to the motion of magnetic bubble arrays and to the driven motion of vortices in thin film superconductors when the randomness is strong enough to destroy the tendencies to lattice order even on short length scales. Various history dependent phenomena are also discussed.Comment: 63 preprint pages plus 6 figures. Submitted to Phys Rev

U.S. domestic and international financial reform policy: Are G20 commitments and the Dodd-Frank Act in sync?

The Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 is the keystone policy response directed at reforming U.S. financial system activities and oversight in the wake of the 2007-2009 financial crisis. The United States also has financial system reform policy commitments in the international arena, including in particular by virtue of its membership in the G20. This analysis considers U.S. policy initiatives related to a core dimension of financial system reform: risks posed by systemically important financial institutions ("SIFIs"). It provides a comparison of SIFI policy initiatives and timetables under both the Dodd-Frank Act and the G20 agenda, as reflected in the ongoing work plan of the Financial Stability Board (FSB), and poses the question "Are U.S. domestic and international financial system reform commitments in sync?" While finding that, fundamentally, the answer is "yes," the detailed comparison yields two caveats with potential policy implications. First, the two agendas differ in their relative emphasis on the coverage of both banks and nonbanks. The G20/FSB focus, at least over the near-term, is bank-centric compared with the Dodd-Frank Act, which consistently addresses both bank and nonbank financial firms. Second, implementation of Dodd-Frank Act provisions is subject to long-established U.S. law mandating that there be sufficient opportunity for public input into the rulemaking process, whereas the G20/FSB process has been less systematic and transparent on public consultation and feedback. The lesser emphasis on transparency and public input characterizing the G20/FSB policy development process may be attributable in part to the somewhat more rapid pace of the G20/FSB agenda relative to corresponding Dodd-Frank Act timelines. These observations may be relevant to the current debate over the speed and scope of Dodd-Frank Act implementation measures, and to the discussion about the future international competitiveness of U.S. banks and nonbank financial firms.Financial institutions ; Financial crises ; Regulatory reform