Ripple-Spreading Network of China's Systemic Financial Risk Contagion: New Evidence from the Regime-Switching Model

被引:0
|
作者
Zhang, Beibei [1 ]
Xie, Xuemei [1 ]
Zhou, Xi [2 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Univ Posts & Telecommun, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing 100876, Peoples R China
[2] Zhejiang A&F Univ, Jiyang Coll, Shaoxing 311800, Peoples R China
关键词
CONNECTEDNESS;
D O I
10.1155/2024/5316162
中图分类号
O1 [数学];
学科分类号
0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
A better understanding of financial contagion and systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) is essential for the prevention and control of systemic financial risk. Considering the ripple effect of financial contagion, we integrate the relevant spatiotemporal information that affects financial contagion and propose to use the ripple-spreading network to simulate the dynamic process of risk contagion in China's financial system. In addition, we introduce the smooth-transition vector autoregression (STVAR) model to identify "high" and "low" systemic risk regimes and set the relevant parameters of the ripple-spreading network on this basis. The results show that risk ripples spread much faster in high than in low systemic risk regimes. However, systemic shocks can also trigger large-scale risk contagion in the financial system even in a low systemic risk regime as the risk ripple continues. In addition, whether the financial system is in a high or low systemic risk regime, the risk ripples from a contagion source (i.e., a real estate company) spread first to the real estate sector and the banking sector. The network centrality results of the heterogeneous ripple-spreading network indicate that most securities and banks and some real estate companies have the highest systemic importance, followed by the insurance, and finally the diversified financial institutions. Our study provides a new perspective on the regulatory practice of systemic financial risk and reminds regulators to focus not only on large institutions but also on institutions with strong ripple capacity.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] State-dependent size and value premium: evidence from a regime-switching asset pricing model
    Li, Bingxin
    Piqueira, Natalia
    JOURNAL OF ASSET MANAGEMENT, 2019, 20 (03) : 229 - 249
  • [32] China's risk contagion using the mixed-frequency macro-financial network
    Jiang, Cuixia
    Gao, Haijing
    Xu, Qifa
    ECONOMIC SYSTEMS, 2024, 48 (04)
  • [33] Interconnectedness, systemic risk, and the influencing factors: Some evidence from China's financial institutions
    Wu, Shan
    Tong, Mu
    Yang, Zhongyi
    Zhang, Tianyi
    PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 2021, 569
  • [34] State-dependent size and value premium: evidence from a regime-switching asset pricing model
    Bingxin Li
    Natalia Piqueira
    Journal of Asset Management, 2019, 20 : 229 - 249
  • [35] Institutional investor heterogeneity and systemic financial risk: Evidence from China
    Huang, Wenli
    Zhu, Yuanhao
    Li, Shi
    Xu, Yueling
    RESEARCH IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS AND FINANCE, 2024, 68
  • [36] Systemic Risk Contagion in Reconstructed Financial Credit Network within Banking and Firm Sectors on DebtRank Based Model
    Bian, Yuetang
    Wang, Yu
    Xu, Lu
    DISCRETE DYNAMICS IN NATURE AND SOCIETY, 2020, 2020
  • [37] Bank liquidity creation, network contagion and systemic risk: Evidence from Chinese listed banks
    Zhang, Xingmin
    Fu, Qiang
    Lu, Liping
    Wang, Qingyu
    Zhang, Shuai
    JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL STABILITY, 2021, 53
  • [38] Financial stress, regime switching and spillover effects: Evidence from a multi-regime global VAR model
    Chen, Pu
    Semmler, Willi
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC DYNAMICS & CONTROL, 2018, 91 : 318 - 348
  • [39] Dynamic impact of climate risks on financial systemic risk: Evidence from China
    Tian, Ruwei
    Li, Xin
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCE, 2025, 25 (01)
  • [40] TAYLOR RULE AND DISCRETIONARY REGIMES IN THE UNITED STATES: EVIDENCE FROM A k-STATE MARKOV REGIME-SWITCHING MODEL
    Alba, Joseph D.
    Wang, Peiming
    MACROECONOMIC DYNAMICS, 2017, 21 (03) : 817 - 833