BANKING SECTOR PERFORMANCE DURING LIBERALIZATION IN INDIAA REVIEW

Dr. A. Amarender Reddy

Economist
Indian Institute of Pulses Research
Kanpur-208024
India
Email: aareddy12@email.com
Abstract
Financial sector in India is changed over the past decade due to technological
innovation, deregulation of financial services, external financial liberalization and
organizational changes in the corporate. Competition among financial institutions
further increased due to emphasis on market-based outcomes and resultant deregulation
of interest rates on deposits as well as on the advances. Technological advances in
information technology and securitization bill, reduction in employee strength through
voluntary retirement schemes has greatly reduced costs and non-performing assets
thereby increased profits, productivity and efficiency among Indian banks with
simultaneous increase in costumer services with competitive costs. There was a
convergence of performance among public, private and foreign banks in recent years due
to adoption of technology. There was an increasing importance of non-interest income in
recent years for all banks. Even though PSBs comparing poorly with the other two
categories in terms of profit, PSBs had the highest efficiency in deposit mobilization. And
foreign and private banks are efficient in value added services. There has been a decline
in spreads and intermediation costs widely used measures of efficiency in banking and a
tendency towards their convergence across all bank-groups. While most of the studies
emphasized market related financial efficiency measures to boost banking sector, equally
good number of studies emphasized the importance of prudential and regulatory
measures to increase financial health and stability of banking sector. Only cost effective,
costumer focused, technology driven, capital strengthen banks which follow prudential
regulations can only sustain in attracting depositors and borrowers in the current
competitive environment. The individual banks have to be competitive on the one hand
and the regulator should ensure that the prudential norms should ensure needed stability
and financial health of banks without jeopardizing the proper incentives to banks.
Key words: banking sector , liberalization, efficiency

BANKING SECTOR PERFORMANCE DURING LIBERALIZATION IN INDIAA REVIEW

1. Introduction
Financial sector in India is changed drastically since late 1990s due to technological
innovation, financial liberalization with entry of new private and foreign banks, and
regulatory changes in the corporate sector. (Allahabad Bank, 2002). The intense
competition between these new entrances with the already existing public sector banks to
cater needs of same pie of consumers facilitated implementation of new ways in reduce
costs at the same time attracting customers/business. Further liberalization of financial
sector facilitated development of capital markets; non-banking financial institutions that
absorb current and potential borrowers and bank depositor thereby banks may face
competition both in raising resources and in deploying them. In the current scenario,
liberalization and deregulation has to go hand in hand with a greater emphasis on
efficiency, consolidation, asset quality and profitability (Jalan 2002).
The developments in banking sector such as technological advances in information
technology and securitisation bill, reduction in employee strength through Voluntary
Retirement Schemes (VRS) has greatly reduced costs and Non-Performing Assets
(NPAs) thereby increased efficiency among Indian banks. What is equally important is
that the intermediation process has improved even in Public Sector Banks (PSBs), as it is
evident from the ratio of net interest income (interest spreads) to total assets of PSBs has
declined from 3.22 in 1990-91 to 2.84 in 2000-01 even though there was an improvement
in mode of function of banks from one of mere intermediator to that of provider of quick,
cost effective and efficient services (Bhide et al., 2002).
However there is still a large gap to be filled in improving financial health and providing
quality customer services, reducing NPAs, and improving corporate governance practices
in banks in general, and in PSBs in particular. Lower level of provisioning for NPAs
when compared to international standards is also a problem. For example, PSBs on
average provide for 55 per cent of their NPAs, while provisioning by foreign banks is
much higher at 70 per cent whereas international banks provide up to 140 percent. It was

recognised that restoration of health of the banking system required both a stock solution
(i.e., restoration of net worth) and flow solution (i.e., an improvement in future
profitability) (Joshi and little 1997). Recent interest rate deregulation exposes the banks
to interest rate risk (market risk). Such interest rate risk has a potential impact on net
interest income as well as on the market value of the fixed income securities held by the
banks, which may affect bank risk exposure. The issue of capital adequacy and
recapitalisation also require urgent attention (Jaikvoulle and Kauko 2001). With the
above background the paper specifically reviews banking sector performance (especially
scheduled commercial banks) and its determinants in developing countries perspective
especially in Indian context.
In analyzing the functions performed by commercial banks, Bergendhal(1998) mentions
five fundamental goals of efficient bank management: profit maximization, risk
management, service provision, intermediation and utility provision. To keep it simple,
one can redefine the five goals in to two by pooling the five goals, i.e., profit
maximization (combining features of Bergendhals profit maximization and risk
management) and interest spreads (combining service provision, intermediation and
utility provision). As by reducing interest spread one can maximize utility of bank
customers i.e., reduce intermediation cost in providing services to both depositors and
borrowers.
The banking system in India comprises the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), commercial
banks, regional rural banks and the co-operative banks. In the recent past, private nonbanking finance companies also have been active in the financial system, and are being
regulated by the RBI. As in 2000, commercial banks (which include public sector banks,
private sector banks and foreign banks) remains the most dominant with nearly 62 per
cent of financial assets, followed by investment institutions (18.6%), term lending
institutions (15.1%) and cooperative banks (2.6 per cent) (Aditya and Ghosh 2001).
Indian banking sector has been characterized by the predominance of PSBs. The PSBs
had 47,579 branches during 2001 with total assets of Rs. 10,298 billion, which accounted
for 79.5% of assets of all Scheduled Commercial Banks (SCBs) in India. PSBs account
for 81% of deposits, 79% of advances, 78% of income, and 90% of branches of all

commercial banks during the year 2001. Private sector banks accounted for 12.6% of the
total assets and foreign banks accounted for 7.9% of the total assets of all SCBs. The
primary activity of most foreign banks in India has been in the corporate segment, while
public sector banks cater to the needs of wider mass of India. However, in recent years,
some of the larger foreign banks have started making consumer financing. The recent
increase in foreign direct investment cap in banks from 49 per cent to 74 percent is a
significant development in liberaizing banking sector to foreign participation.
2. Performance of Indian Banking Sector
In a study that covers more recent period, Das (1999) compares performance among
public sector banks for three years in the post-reform period, 1992, 1995 and 1998. He
finds a certain convergence in performance. He also notes that while there is a welcome
increase in emphasis on non-interest income, banks have tend to show risk-averse
behavior by opting for risk-free investments over risky loans.
Sarkar and Das (1997) compare performance of public, private and foreign banks for the
year 1994-95 by using measures of profitability, productivity and financial management.
They find PSBs comparing poorly with the other two categories.
Bhattacharya et al., (1997) studied the impact of the limited liberalization initiated before
the deregulation of the nineties on the performance of the different categories of banks,
using Data Envelopment Analysis. Their study covered 70 banks in the period 1986-91.
They constructed one grand frontier for the entire period and measured technical
efficiency of the banks under study. They found PSBs had the highest efficiency among
the three categories, with foreign and private banks having much lower efficiencies.
However, PSBs started showing a decline in efficiency after 1987, private banks showed
no change and foreign banks showed a sharp rise in efficiency. The main results accord
with the general perception that in the nationalized era, public sector banks were
successful in achieving their principal objectives of deposit and loan expansion.
However, Das (1997), which analysed overall efficiency technical, allocative and scale
efficiency of PSBs in the period 1990-96, found a decline in overall efficiency. This

occurred because there was a decline in technical efficiency, which was not offset by an
improvement in allocative efficiency. The study, however, pointed out that the
deterioration in technical efficiency was mainly on account of four nationalized banks.
In a review of performance of banks, RBI (1999a) concluded that 1. There has been a
decline in spreads a widely used measure of efficiency in banking and a tendency towards
their convergence across all bank-groups except foreign banks. 2. Intermediation costs as
a percentage of total assets have also declined especially for PSBs and new private sector
banks, due largely to a decline in their wage costs. 3. Capital adequacy and asset quality
(measured by the net NPAs as percentage of net advances) have both improved over the
period 1995-96 to 1999-2000. 4. Median profit per employee of PSBs witnessed a
significant rise from 1996-97 to 1999-2000. 5. Non-interest income to working funds rose
modestly for the median PSBs. 6. The ratio wage bill to total expenses remained at a high
level for PSBs. 7. The cost to income ratio declined for PSBs. The RBI noted that,
Developments after 1996 indicate that a majority of the public sector banks have been
able to progress considerably towards the direction of passing the acid test of achieving
competitive efficiency.
The difference between the interest rate charged to borrower and the interest rate paid to
depositors, which reflects the cost of intermediation (interest spread), is an important
indicator of efficiency. The main components of interest spread are non-interest income,
overhead, taxes, and loan loss provisions and after tax bank profits. The efficiency of the
banking system as a whole, measured by declining spreads/total assets (3.22 in 1991-92
to 2.7 in 1999-2000), has improved, and public sector banks have improved their
performance in both absolute and relative terms (Ram, 2002). In contrary to that Souza
(2002) argued that banking system as a whole has not become more efficient as measured
by the interest spreads/working funds which have been rising (2.10 in 1990-91 to 2.73 in
1999-2000 for all banks) and not declining. However, there are some issues need to be
addressed in PSBs such as low provisioning to non-performing assets and low employee
productivity compared to private and foreign banks. The turnover per employee in the
private banks doubled relative to the public sector banks during the 1990s. The
establishment expenses as percent of total expenses drastically declined in private and

foreign banks due to these banks have been able to contain their wages and salaries
expenditures compared to the public sector banks however private and foreign banks
spend more on technology up gradation.
Another indicator of bank efficiency is the quality of assets (NPAs). As of March
31,2002, the gross NPAs of scheduled commercial banks stood at Rs.71, 000 crore.
Although the net NPAs of the commercial banks in India have witnessed a decline over
the past several years, they are still high as compared to developed country standards of
around 2 per cent. Some argue that, the high level of NPAs in PSBs was due to higher
proportion of NPAs in priority sector advances by PSBs which was attributed to the
directed and pre-approved nature of loans sanctioned under government sponsored
programmes, absence of any security, lack of effective follow up due to large number of
accounts, legal recovery measures being considered not cost effective, vitiation of
repayment culture consequent to loan waiver schemes, etc (Nachane, 1999; RBI, 1999b).
However, all banks but three have met RBIs capital adequacy norm of 9 per cent in 2002.
Performance measured by gross and net return on average assets worsens and liquidity
(measured by cash over assets) declines for weak banks.
The commercial banking system in the country has become quite apprehensive of
exposing itself to lending risk and has developed an unhealthy appetite for government
securities. The pace at which the commercial banks invested in government securities far
exceeded those in both deposit mobilization and credit disbursal (Nair, 2000) as in the
low interest rate regime trading profits very high for government securities (Rakesh,
2002).
In a cross-bank study for India Sarkar et al., (1998) regresses two profitability and four
efficiency measures on pooled data for two years 1993-94 and 1994-95, for a total of 73
banks, using single equation OLS estimation for each. They found that after controlling
for total assets, proportion of government securities to total assets, proportion of priority
sector loans, share of rural banking, non-interest income to total income, foreign
ownership showed positive association with profitability and efficiency. Ajit and Bangar
(1998) present a tabulation of the performance of private sector banks vis--vis public

sector banks over the period 1996-1997, using a number of indicators: profitability ratio,
interest spread, capital adequacy ratio and the net NPA. The conclusion is that Indian
private banks out perform public sector banks. The study also found that Indian private
banks have higher returns to assets in spite of lower spreads.
Rajaraman et al., (1999) show that bank-specific characteristics such as ownership or
adherence to prudential norms do not suffice to explain inter-bank variability in NPAs
while region of operation matters. The study argued that banks functioning in less
developed areas like Bihar were having high NPAs, while banks functioning in
developed regions such as Delhi, Punjab were having less NPAs.
As Indian banking system is predominantly a public sector one, the incentive structure
differs significantly from those prevailing under private sector banking. In the changed
scenario of liberalization, banks will have to bring about an overall improvement in their
working covering human resource management, technology up gradation and integrated
risk management (Jalan 2001).
3. International Experience
3.1 Interest Spreads and Profitability
Financial systems in developing countries typically exhibit significantly high and
persistent spreads as cost of poor quality loans is shifted to bank customers through
higher spreads (Barajas et al., 2000). Similarly Brock and Suarez (2000) also find
significant evidence of a positive relation between spreads and wages or non-financial
costs. Non-financial costs reflect variations in physical capital costs, employment and
wage levels. While studying bank restructure policies of 11 transition countries during
1991-98, Zoli (2001) stated that an increase in interest spreads may indicate that banks
are facing riskier borrowers and hence charging them with higher rates or that banks need
to cover larger expenses due to loan losses. So a decline in the spread is interpreted as an
improvement in efficiency. Undercapitalized banks faced distorted incentives in
extending new loans and were prone to excessive risk taking and high spreads. The

excess risk taking was also encouraged by the government by retaining a controlling
stake in major banks that creates the expectations of future bailout.
Intermediation margins are positively related to market power in the Columbian banking
system (Barajas et al., 1999). A study by Asli and Harry (1998) while studying bank
performance that taken interest spread and bank profitability as dependent variables and
bank specific variables (size, leverage, type of business, foreign ownership), country
specific variables (macro-economic, legal and institutional environment) as explanatory
variables concluded that foreign banks are better in terms of net profits with high interest
spread and low NPAs. The study found that higher interest spread could indicate greater
banking efficiency under segmented or imperfectly competitive markets.
Implicit taxes such as Cash Reserve Ratios (CRR), Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR) and
priority sector lending are at higher level in developing countries, which is also a cause
for higher spreads. There is a positive and significant relationship between spreads and
liquidity reserves in the Columbian banking system (Barajas et al., 1999). Despite high
wages, overhead as a share of total assets appears to be lowest at around 1 per cent for
banks in high-income countries. Large banks tend to have smaller overheads.
The above studies are providing contradictory evidence about interest spread as bank
efficiency indicator in developing countries perspective such as in India. In the long run
banking system should be stable and efficient to enhance overall development of the
country. Stability clearly requires sufficient banking profitability, while economic
efficiency requires banking spreads that are not too large. A prerequisite to formulating
effective banking policies is thus to understand the determinants of bank profitability and
interest margin ( Asli and Harry 1999).
3.2 Deposit Rates
One instrument to increase profitability and spread was lowering deposit rates, which
lowers cost of funds to banks. Abdourahmane (2000) by using United States data
concluded that, commercial banks ability to lower deposit interest rates diminishes when
their deposits become closer substitutes to non-bank liabilities requiring greater interest

rate competition (for example ceiling rate for non-bank financial companies were around
11 percent compared to average bank deposit rate of about 6 to 7 percent). Deposits can
be inputs for the production of bank loans (an intermediation service) or safekeeping
services output provided to depositors (a non-intermediation service). The same deposits
may also be inputs to the provision of payment services (checking services). The
framework shows that the input-output nature of banking deposits may be such that banks
to use their market power on deposits to subsidize non-intermediation service fees as
deposit raising strategy. Therefore reduction of deposit interest rate does not mean a lack
of competition but an increase in competition by using another means. Banks would
lower deposit interest rate provided they have market power on deposits and nonintermediation services. Given the low-income levels in developing countries, small
savers and demand depositors may be less sensitive to the deposit interest rate and more
responsive to the convenience of bank branches and payments services for savings,
safekeeping and transactions. The public sector commercial banks are having advantage
in competing via branch banking that may be good for financial deepening. While foreign
banks are competing via providing non-intermediation banking services, which ultimately
may increase domestic banks efficiency and foster domestic financial deepening
(Bernado and Douglous, 2001).
3.3 Prudential Regulations and Banking Restructuring
While most of the studies emphasized market related financial efficiency measures
(spread and profitability) to boost banking sector, equally good number of studies
emphasized the importance of prudential and regulatory measures to increase financial
health and stability of banking sector. Prudential tightening covered exposure and
disclosure norms, guidelines on investment, risk management, asset classification and
provisioning. A study on Croatian banking system argued that fundamental determinant
of profitability is probably good management, which succeeds both in cutting costs and
managing risk prudently. It is the good prudential management rather than cost efficiency
explains the survival of more cost efficient banks in turbulent waters of transition
banking (Evan et al., 2002).

While discussing consequences of weak prudential regulation upon Russian banking

system Gidadhubli (2001) stated that due to the low minimum capital requirements a
large number of small banks were set up. Most of these banks engaged in utilizing their
resources for speculative activities such as exchanging rubles into dollars or vice versa to
earn quick profits. It was reported that a few banks even used money borrowed from
government and the central bank of Russia for transactions due to the inefficient
regulation. In line with this David and Vlad (2002) found that tighter minimum capital
adequacy ratios seem to be associated with improved revenue generating capacity and
more aggressive deposit taking behavior. Well-capitalised banks face lower expected
bankruptcy costs, thereby reducing their cost of funding.
In a study of crisis and restructuring of Indonesian banking system, Mari and Manggi
(2002) listed causes for banking crisis as Firstly, a rapid expansion of the banking sector
without necessary strengthening of prudential regulations and central bank supervision.
Secondly, the high concentration of ownership in the banking sector led to weak
corporate governance of banks. An even more serious problem was the lack of ability to
enforce prudential regulations because of the weak capacity and capability of central
bank supervisors, widespread corruption and political interference. Further it was
believed that banks would be bailed out in case of bank failure by the government and
there was no effective exit mechanism for failed banks.
In response to crisis, Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) was set up to
supervise and restructure the banking sector. The IBRAs mandate was to close merge or
take over and recapitalise troubled banks. The banking reforms also included steps to
intensify the supervision of a number of the largest private banks, rehabilitation and
surveillance plans for a number of smaller private banks and mergers of state owned
banks. The IBRA has recommended change in management some banks, reducing
number of banks to consolidate and increase scale and scope economies that will increase
performance and profitability. It also recommended higher capital requirements for
banks, as Indonesian banks need to operate in riskier environment. The high capital
requirement is widely practiced in high-risk environment such as community banks in
United States. It also recommended efficient deposit insurance scheme by giving

10

incentive to better performing banks by linking the annual premium payments to their
risk profile.
Asli et al., (2000) stated that in crisis period rate of growth of real deposits falls
significantly, in fact banks lose other sources of funding (such as inter bank credit,
foreign loans, commercial paper or equity) more rapidly than deposits, as witnessed by
significant increase in the ratio of deposits to assets. On the assets side real credit slows
down and NPAs increased significantly, banks shifts their portfolio away from loans to
shift to safer assets to economize on regulatory capital. The drop in sources of funds calls
for an effective management of liquidity in times of crisis.
4. Reforms and Restructuring of Banking System in India
In the above backdrop there was a need for further reforms and prudential regulations to
be placed in adjust with the technological advances and economic conditions. The
economists case for justifying prudential regulation in the field of banking is due to the
existence of two types of market imperfections i.e., externalities-social cost of failure of
banking system far exceeds private costs and information failures-as small
depositors/clients does not have capacity to evaluate financial contracts and safety with
banks (Souza 2000). However the approach to achieve the above objectives should be
market friendly and cost effective with greater reliance should be placed on incentives
and less on supervision.
Institutional restructuring encompasses reforms of the legal framework, prudential
regulations, accounting standards and banking supervision. Operational restructuring
deals with the flow problems caused by sizable non-performing loans and high operating
costs and aims at improving corporate governance.
The Working Group of RBI under chairmanship of M.S.Verma while identifying three
weak banks, which fall short of every competitive benchmark. In every business segment,
in cost, productivity and profitability, in technology and systems support, in internal
control and risk management procedures, in their mode of operation and servicing of
customers. The restructuring plan has been prepared for these banks. And suggested

11

seven parameters covering three major areas i. Solvency (capital adequacy ratio and
coverage ratio), ii. Earning capacity (return on assets and net interest margin) and iii.
Profitability (include operating profit to average working funds, cost to income and staff
cost to net interest income plus other income), The core of the strategy to restructure
weak banks suggested by Verma Committee comprises five components.
1. Shed the load of non-performing assets by creating an Asset Reconstruction Fund
(ARF) to clean the balance sheet of large Non-Performing Assets (NPAs).
2. Shed excess manpower by introducing a voluntary retirement scheme (VRS) or a
25 per cent reduction in salary in case of failure to do so.
3. Install a credible and effective governance model at the board and the top
management level.
4. Review and change the core processes in each of the banks, principally those
pertaining to technology, customer service and human resources and
5. Establish a Financial Restructuring Authority (FRA) with statutory banking to
oversee the restructuring process of the three weak banks.
In stage one, focus will be on operational, organizational and financial restructuring of
the units involved, which aims at restoring their competitive efficiency. In the stage two
of restructuring, after investor attention, privatization or mergers will then assume
relevance. In line with the above recommendations, during 2001-02 RBI has taken many
policy measures in the context of the banking sector which were guided by the objectives
of strengthening the banking sector through rigorous operational, prudential and
accounting norms set to gradually converge to international standards (basal capital
standards). Banks were encouraged to prepare themselves to follow international
practices in respect of assigning capital for market risk. Initiatives in the direction of
redefining the regulatory oversight of the Reserve Bank such as mitigating the potential
conflict of interest regarding issues of ownership, risk-based supervision, consolidated
accounting and supervision, off-site monitoring and inspection are underway. Policy
attention was also drawn to issues in management of NPAs and related supervisory
initiatives, including the setting up of Asset Reconstruction Company and the revival of
weak public sector banks. New avenues of banking activity were created in insurance and
the access of the banking sector to foreign direct investment was enhanced during 200102(RBI 2002).

12

The RBI has also initiated certain structured actions in respect of the banks now widely
known as Prompt Corrective Actions (PCA), based on trigger points in terms of CAR,
Net NPA and Return on Assets (ROA). The Reserve Bank, at its discretion, will resort to
additional actions (discretionary actions) as indicated under each of the trigger points. In
this process a high-risk bank will be subjected to enhanced supervisory focus through a
shorter supervisory cycle and greater use of various supervisory tools like targeted
inspections, intensive off-site surveillance, structured meetings with bank management,
commissioned audits etc. In addition to these above prudential norms, progressive
deregulation of interest rates, shaving of priority lending commitments and moderating
statutory liquidity and reserve norms have steadily oriented the banking sector towards
the market (Patel 2000).
Although tightening prudential requirements may limit banks flexibility and profitability
in the short run, doing so may encourage banks to look for new and innovative ways to
invest, thereby expanding the production-possibility frontier. It is therefore essential for a
policy maker to be able to identify and come up with the best (often the least-cost) policy
response. However one cautious about excessive or inappropriate regulation, as it can
stifle efficiency and invite moral hazard problems and induce entities to move out of
over-regulated business to less regulated ones (Reddy 2001).
5. Conclusions
Financial sector in India is changed over the past decade due to technological innovation,
deregulation of financial services, external financial liberalization and organizational
changes in the corporate. Competition among financial institutions further increased due
to emphasis on market-based outcomes and resultant deregulation of interest rates on
deposits as well as on the advances. Technological advances in information technology
and securitisation bill, reduction in employee strength through voluntary retirement
schemes has greatly reduced costs and non-performing assets thereby increased profits,
productivity and efficiency among Indian banks with simultaneous increase in costumer
services with competitive costs. However there is still a large gap to be filled in
improving financial health and providing quality customer services, reducing NPAs, and

13

improving corporate governance practices in banks in general, and in PSBs in particular

compared to international standards. There was a convergence of performance among
public, private and foreign banks in recent years due to adoption of technology. There
was an increasing importance of non-interest income in recent years for all banks. Even
though PSBs comparing poorly with the other two categories in terms of profit, PSBs had
the highest efficiency in deposit mobilization. And foreign and private banks are efficient
in value added services.
There has been a decline in spreads and intermediation costs widely used measures of
efficiency in banking and a tendency towards their convergence across all bank-groups.
The establishment expenses as percent of total expenses drastically declined in private
and foreign banks due to these banks have been able to contain their wages and salary
expenditures compared to the public sector banks however private and foreign banks
spend more on technology up gradation. As a result turnover per employee in the private
banks doubled relative to the public sector banks during the 1990s. Another indicator of
bank efficiency is NPAs, although the net NPAs of the commercial banks in India have
witnessed a decline over the past several years, they are still high. Some studies argued
region of operation play a greater role in amount of problem loans than the type of
ownership of banks. That is banks functioning in less developed regions were having
high NPAs compared to banks functioning in developed regions.While most of the
studies emphasized market related financial efficiency measures to boost banking sector,
equally good number of studies emphasized the importance of prudential and regulatory
measures to increase financial health and stability of banking sector. It is the good
management rather than cost efficiency explains the survival of more cost efficient banks
in turbulent waters of transition banking. International experience Russian and
Indonesian banking systems were good examples of inefficient central banks and
prudential regulations. Due to low minimum capital requirements a large number of small
banks were set up which were weak, which lead to banking crisis in later periods.
International experience also shows that high concentration of ownership, weak corporate
governance, lack of ability to enforce prudential regulations, weak central bank
supervisors, widespread corruption and political interference are major reasons for

14

banking crisis in most of the developing countries. According to the Varma committee of
RBI, solvency, earning capacity and profitability were major thrust areas banks to follow.
The committee also recommended shed the load of non-performing assets by creating an
asset reconstruction fund, shed excess manpower by introducing a voluntary retirement
scheme, establishment of a financial restructuring authority with statutory banking to
oversee the restructuring process of the weak banks. The RBI has also initiated certain
structured actions in respect of the banks now widely known as prompt corrective
actions, which have hit the trigger points in terms of capital adequacy ratio, nonperforming assets and return on assets.
In short, only cost effective, costumer focused, technology driven, capital strengthen
banks which follow prudential regulations can only sustain in attracting depositors and
borrowers in the current competitive environment. The individual banks have to be
competitive on the one hand and the regulator should ensure that the prudential norms
should ensure needed stability and financial health of banks without jeopardizing the
proper incentives to banks.
References:
Abdourahmane, S. (2000) Financial Liberalisation, Bank Market Structure and Financial
Deepening: An Interest Margin Analysis, International Monetary Fund Working Paper,
WP/00/38
Aditya, N and S. Ghosh (2001): Bank Supervisory Arrangements: International
Evidence and Indian Perspective, Economic and Political Weekly, September 15, Pp.
3543-3553.
Ajit, D and R. D. Bangar (1998): The Role and Performance of Private Sector Banks in
India-1991-2 to 1996-97, Political Economy Journal of India 7(1), Pp. 7-20.
Allahabad Bank (2002) Initial Public Offer Document, Allahabad Bank, 26th Sept. 2002,
Calcutta. Pp. 2.
Asli, D.K., and H. Harry (1998): Determinants of Commercial Bank Interest Margins and
Profitability: Some International Evidence, World Bank, Working paper series.

15

Asli D. K., and H. Harry (1999), Determinants of Commercial Bank Interest Margins
and Profitability: Some International Evidence, The World Bank Economic Review, Vol.
134(2), 379-408.
Asli D.K., D. Enrica and P. Gupta (2000) Inside the crisis: An Empirical Analysis of
Banking System in Distress, International Monetary Fund Working Paper, No. 156.
Barajas,A., R.Steiner and N.Salazar (1999), Interest Spreads in Banking in
Columbia,1974-96, International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, 46, Pp.196-224.
Barajas,A., R. Steiner and N. Salazar (2000), The impact of liberalization and Foreign
Investment in Columbias Financial Sector, Journal of Development Economics, 36, p
157-196,2000.
Bergendhal., G (1998) DEA and Benchmarks-An Application to Nordic Banks, Annals
of Operations Research, Vol. 82, P 233-49.
Bernado, B. N. and W. Douglous (2001), Management of Core Capabilities in Mexican
and European Banks, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 19. (2) 89-100.
Bhattacharya, A., C.A.K. Lovell and P. Sahay. (1997): The Impact of Liberalisation on
the Productive Efficiency of Indian Commercial Banks, European Journal of Operational
Research, Vol 98,332-45.
Bhide, M G, A. Prasad and S. Ghosh (2002) Banking Sector Reforms: A Critical
Overview, Economic and Political Weekly, February 2-8, P 399-408.
Brock,P.L. and R. L Suarez (2000),Understanding the Behavior of Bank Spreads in
Latin America, Journal of Development Economics, 63,p.113-134.
Das, A. (1997): Technical, Allocative and Scale Efficiency of Public Sector Banks in
India RBI Occasional papers 18, June-September.
Das, A. (1999): Profitability of Public Sector Banks: A Decomposition Model, Reserve
Bank of India, Occasional Paper 20,1999.
David A. G., and M. Vlad (2002):, Determinants of Commercial Bank Performance in
Transition: An Application of Data Envelopment Approach, International Monetary Fund
Working Paper, WP/2002/146.
Evan K., H. Richard and P. James (2002), Privatization, Foreign Bank entry and Bank
Efficiency in Croatia: A Fourier Flexible Function Stochastic Cost Frontier Analysis,
Croation National Bank, Working Paper-9.
Gidadhubli, R. G. (2001) Banking Sector in Russia Issues and Problems EPW, June 30,
2001 , pp

16

Jalan, B (2001): Banking and finance in the New millennium, Lecture delivered at the
bank economists conference, New Delhi, January.
Jalan, B (2002):Strengthening Indian Banking and Finance: Progress and Prospects,
Bank Economists conference, Bengolore 27th Dec. 2002.
Jaikvoulle, E and K Kauko (2001): The new basal accord: Some Potential Implications
of the New Standard for Credit risk Bank of Finland Discussion paper, Working
Paper/2000/156.
Joshi, V and I M D Little (1997): India: Reform on hold, Asian Development Review,
Vol 15,p 1-42
Mari, P and H. Manggi (2002) The Boom, Bust and Restructuring of Indonesian Banks,
International Monetary Fund Working Paper, WP/2002/66.
Nachane D M (1999) Capital Adequacy Ratios: An Agnostic Viewpoint. Economic and
Political Weekly, January 16-23, p 2916-2920.
Nair,T. S. (2000) Rural Financial Intermediation and Commercial Banks: Review of
Recent Trends, Economic and Political Weekly, January 29, p 299-304.
Patel, U. R. (2000): Outlook for the Indian Financial Sector, Economic and Political
Weekly, November 4, 2000 p 3933-38.
Rajaraman, I., S. Bhaumik, and N. Bhatia (1999) NPA Variations Across Indian
Commercial Banks: Some Findings, Economic and Political Weekly January 16-23,
1999.
Rakesh, M (2002), Transforming Indian Banking: In search of a Better Tomorrow, Bank
economists Conference 2002, Bengalore, 29th December 29.
Ram M.T.T. (2002): Deregulation and Performance of Public Sector Banks, Economic
and Political Weekly, 36 (4), 393-97.
RBI (1999a): Some aspects and issues relating to NPAs in Commercial Banks RBI
Bulletin, July, p 913-93.
RBI (1999b), Report on Currency and Finance, Reserve Bank of India 1999-2000.
RBI (2002) Report of the Central Board of Directors on the Working of the Reserve Bank
of India for the Year ended June 2002, Reserve Bank of India, India
Reddy, Y V (2001): Issues in choosing between Single and Multiple Regulators of
Financial Systems, RBI Bulletin, June, p 707-26.

17

Sarkar, J., S. Subrata and K.B. Sumon (1998): Does Ownership Always Matter?
Evidence from the Indian Banking Industry, Journal of Comparative Economics 26(2),
June 262-81.
Sarkar, P.C. and A. Das (1997): Development of Composite Index of Banking
Efficiency: The Indian Case, Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers, 18,1.
Souza, E. D. (2000):Prudential Regulation in Indian Banking EPW, January, 29,2000 p
287-295.
Souza, E. D. (2002) How well have Public Sector Banks Done? A Note, Economic and
Political Weekly, March 2-8, p 867-870.
Zoli, E (2001) Cost and Effectiveness of Banking Sector Restructuring in Transition
Economies, International Monetary Fund Working Paper, Working Paper /2001/157.

18