AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF RELATIVE EFFICIENCY OF THE BANKING INDUSTRY IN BAHRAIN

Abstract

The paper investigates relative efficiency of the banking industry in Bahrain by employing a panel of 31 banks for the years 1998 and 2000. We employ non‐parametric (Data Envelopment Analysis) to examine five efficiency measures, namely, cost, allocative, technical, pure technical and scale efficiency scores. We also investigate the conventional accounting measures of performance, and correlate them with five measures of efficiency to investigate whether higher accounting performance impact the bank cost efficiency. Our results show that, on the average, the banking industry in Bahrain is profitable with average ROE and ROA being 10.36% 1.622% in 1998 while 13.49% and 2.097% in 2000 respectively. The average allocative efficiency (inefficiency) is about 73% (37%), whereas the average technical efficiency (inefficiency) is about 56% (78%). This indicates that the dominant source of inefficiency in Bahrain banks is due to technical inefficiency rather than allocative inefficiency, which is mainly attributed to diseconomies in scale. Overall, average scale efficiency (inefficiency) is about 79% (26%), and average pure technical efficiency (inefficiency) is about 71% (41%), suggesting that the major source of the total technical inefficiency for Bahrain banks is pure technical inefficiency (input related) and not scale inefficiency (output related). The results also indicate that all banks have improved their efficiency levels and experienced some gains in productivity. Finally, regression analysis is used to investigate the determinants of the overall efficiency scores. We find that larger and profitable banks are more likely to operate at a higher level of efficiency. Also, another finding reveals that market power plays an important role in cost and technical efficiencies. Notably, banks with greater contribution from shareholders tend to be more technical efficient

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.