Does state ownership of banks matter? Russian evidence from the financial crisis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)


This article examines the effects of state ownership and government interventions on lending behaviour and capitalisation of banks over the period 2005–2011. Using data from the highly state-influenced Russian banking sector, it is documented that the relationship between state ownership and lending is nonlinear. While overall loan growth decreased and interest rates rose, it was found that fully state-controlled banks increased lending and charged lower interest rates during the crisis of 2008–2010. Moreover, fully state-owned and state-supported banks demonstrated counter-cyclical lending behaviour during the crisis. However, while state-owned banks were better protected against asset default, there is weak evidence to suggest that government interventions may result in increased riskiness of banks.
Original languageEnglish
Peer-reviewed scientific journalJournal of Emerging Market Finance
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)250-285
Publication statusPublished - 2018
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article - refereed


  • 511 Economics
  • Bank lending
  • State ownership
  • Privatisation
  • Financial crisis
  • Government interventions


Dive into the research topics of 'Does state ownership of banks matter? Russian evidence from the financial crisis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this