What does this research mean for the field?

Geopolitical risk asymmetrically destabilizes banking systems, with more severe impacts on vulnerable banks, while strong national governance quality significantly mitigates these negative shocks. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to understand how geopolitical risk influences banking stability and the role of governance quality in moderating this effect.

June 19, 2026Open Access

Banking stability under geopolitical risk and governance quality

Key Points

This research aims to understand how geopolitical risk influences banking stability and the role of governance quality in moderating this effect.
Analyzed monthly panel data from 2012 to 2021 across 43 countries.
Utilized Quantile Method of Moments Regression and Quantile Local Projections to assess dynamic responses.
Adjusted for macro-financial variables like financial depth, risk provisioning, and governance quality.
Geopolitical risk impacts banking stability asymmetrically across the stability distribution.
Vulnerable banks showed higher destabilizing effects, particularly regarding credit risk.
Stronger governance quality significantly mitigates the negative impacts of geopolitical risks.

Abstract

Abstract The study analyzes the influence of geopolitical risk on banking stability in 43 countries and its moderating effect of governance quality, for SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The banking system is vital for economic growth, and in times of greater global uncertainty, it is imperative that the banking sector is stable. We explore the heterogeneous impact of geopolitical risk (GPRHC) on banking stability, using monthly panel data from 2012m1 to 2021m1 as our baseline and additional annual data (2012–2021) for robustness analysis, under various institutional setups. The empirical model features Quantile Method of Moments Regression (MMQR) and Quantile Local Projections (QLP) which allow to address distributional heterogeneity and dynamic responses at various quantiles of banking stability. This is further validated by annual-frequency estimations, bootstrapped quantile regressions and Simultaneous Quantile Regression (SQR). The models adjust for the most important macro-financial variables: financial depth, banking efficiency, risk provisioning, real GDP per capita, inflation, and governance quality, as well as the interaction between geopolitical risk and the latter. The results indicate that the impact of geopolitical risk is asymmetric and differential along the banking stability distribution. The destabilizing effects are higher for more vulnerable banks, especially in terms of credit risk, and adjustment capacity is higher for more resilient banks. Governance quality as a moderating factor helps lower geopolitical shock impacts. The impact of geopolitical risk is further dampened by a strong institutional quality, as demonstrated by a formal marginal effects analysis, particularly for vulnerable banks. In summary, the results indicate that the impact of geopolitical risk on banking stability is contingent on institutional strength and that better governance is crucial to foster greater financial stability and contribute to sustainable development.

KI fragen

Bookmark

View Full Paper