Fundamentals, Panics, and Bank Distress During the Depression
Top Cited Papers
- 1 November 2003
- journal article
- Published by American Economic Association in American Economic Review
- Vol. 93 (5) , 1615-1647
- https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803322655473
Abstract
We assemble bank-level and other data for Fed member banks to model determinants of bank failure. Fundamentals explain bank failure risk well. The first two Friedman-Schwartz crises are not associated with positive unexplained residual failure risk, or increased importance of bank illiquidity for forecasting failure. The third Friedman-Schwartz crisis is more ambiguous, but increased residual failure risk is small in the aggregate. The final crisis (early 1933) saw a large unexplained increase in bank failure risk. Local contagion and illiquidity may have played a role in pre-1933 bank failures, even though those effects were not large in their aggregate impact.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Financial ContagionJournal of Political Economy, 2000
- Transition Models in a Non-Stationary EnvironmentThe Review of Economics and Statistics, 1994
- The Shoe That Didn't Drop: Explaining Banking Stability During the Great DepressionThe Journal of Economic History, 1994
- The Failure of the Bank of United States, 1930: NoteJournal of Money, Credit and Banking, 1992
- Was the Bank Holiday of 1933 Caused by a Run on the Dollar?The Journal of Economic History, 1987
- The failure of the bank of United States: A reappraisalExplorations in Economic History, 1985
- A Reinterpretation of the Banking Crisis of 1930The Journal of Economic History, 1984
- Bank Runs, Deposit Insurance, and LiquidityJournal of Political Economy, 1983
- A Reconsideration of the Causes of the Banking Panic of 1930The Journal of Economic History, 1980