Time vs. Risk Preferences, Bank Liquidity Provision and Financial Fragility
Ettore Panetti
Abstract
Open-access reader
Ettore Panetti
Abstract
Open-access reader
How important is it to distinguish relative risk aversion (RRA) from the intertemporal elasticity of substitution (IES) to understand bank liquidity provision and financial fragility? To answer this question, I develop a banking theory in which depositors feature Epstein-Zin preferences. In equilibrium, banks provide liquidity when RRA is sufficiently high (low) only for IES larger (smaller) than 1. Under the same conditions, banks might be fragile, i.e. subject to possible self-fulfilling depositors' runs. A time-consistent deposit freeze resolves banks' fragility if RRA is sufficiently low and IES is sufficiently larger than 1.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
How important is it to distinguish relative risk aversion (RRA) from the intertemporal elasticity of substitution (IES) to understand bank liquidity provision and financial fragility? To answer this question, I develop a banking theory in which depositors feature Epstein-Zin preferences. In equilibrium, banks provide liquidity when RRA is sufficiently high (low) only for IES larger (smaller) than 1. Under the same conditions, banks might be fragile, i.e. subject to possible self-fulfilling depositors' runs. A time-consistent deposit freeze resolves banks' fragility if RRA is sufficiently low and IES is sufficiently larger than 1.
Key concepts: Fragility, Financial fragility, Market liquidity, Elasticity of substitution, Liquidity risk, Monetary economics, Risk aversion (psychology), Economics