2012
DOI: 10.1080/1351847x.2012.698993
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cooperative bank efficiency in Japan: a parametric distance function analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Cuesta and Zofío (2005) using the translog hyperbolic distance function estimated the efficiency of Spanish savings banks. Glass et al (2014) employed the enhanced hyperbolic distance function to measure the relative performance of Japanese cooperative banks modelling non-performing loans as an undesirable output. Suta et al (2010) using the hyperbolic distance function approach, calculated the environmental technical efficiency scores of selected EU farms (Bulgaria, Romania and Poland).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cuesta and Zofío (2005) using the translog hyperbolic distance function estimated the efficiency of Spanish savings banks. Glass et al (2014) employed the enhanced hyperbolic distance function to measure the relative performance of Japanese cooperative banks modelling non-performing loans as an undesirable output. Suta et al (2010) using the hyperbolic distance function approach, calculated the environmental technical efficiency scores of selected EU farms (Bulgaria, Romania and Poland).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Evaluating technical efficiency of Japanese credit cooperatives, Glass et al. () also find a presence of technical progress between 1998 and 2009. Technical progress also existed for all banks in the early 1990s, although different productivity measures yield different timing for its presence (Fukuyama, ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…7, 12 we follow the widely used intermediation approach (Sealey and Lindley, 1977). We characterise three proxies for inputs: x 1 interest expenses (Glass et al, 2014;Liu and Tone, 2008), x 2 fixed assets (Assaf et al, 2011;Fukuyama and Weber, 2008), and x 3 general and administrative expenses 13 (Drake and Hall, 2003;Liu and Tone, 2008). We define our outputs in line with Barros et al (2009), Assaf et al 2011, Barros et al (2012) as y 1 net loans and bills discounted, and y 2 net earning assets which include net investments, securities, and other earning assets.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(ROA), and net interest margin (NIM) (Glass et al, 2014). NIM is defined by the difference between interest incomes and interest expenses to total interest-earning assets (Nguyen, 2012).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%