Does the ownership structure matter for banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior? Empirical evidence from a developing country

This paper applies the two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator to examine the bi-directional relationship between banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior concerning the impact of ownership structure. We have used a balanced panel dataset of banks from a developing country over the most recent period between 2006 and 2014. The empirical findings of this study suggest that higher capital regulation enhances banks’ stability when it combats with credit risk but higher credit risk often persuades abating capital ratio. Particularly, the key results are as follows: (i) the higher association of minority active shareholding in stability issues is positive; (ii) the higher contribution of active share holding promotes banks’ capital ratio; (iii) the lower ownership concentration prevents credit risk; (iv) private commercial banks are more risk averse and stable than state-owned banks and other type of banks; and (v) notably, Islamic banks show their superiority through overall performance despite their lower capital stability than conventional banks. Besides, no models show significant non-linear relationship between capital regulation and risk-taking except models of stability show a U-shaped relation in capital equation, indicating that when regulatory pressure works in a country then bank lose solvency at the initial stage. Finally, it also provides some imperative policy implications which will be very useful for a wide range of stakeholders.