IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/7378321.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Difference between the determinants of operational risk reporting in Islamic and conventional banks: evidence from Saudi Arabia

Author

Listed:
  • Wael Hemrit

Abstract

In this study, the author investigates the operational risk reporting practices of Islamic banking institutions (IBIs) and conventional banks (CBs) in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, the paper explores the joint effect of banking characteristics, corporate governance and credit rating on the informational content of operational risk disclosure (OpRiskDISC). The paper uses content analysis to collect OpRiskDISC data from annual reports during the period 2008–15. The results for each bank type show that the enhanced OpRiskDISC in IBIs is negatively associated with the number of bank branches, the financial stability ;of the bank, board meeting frequency, the proportion of independent members and credit rating. The results for CBs demonstrate that a bank’s size and financial stability are positively associated with OpRiskDISC. Conversely, the OpRiskDISC level is negatively affected by board meeting frequency and the number of bank branches. For the overall sample, the empirical results show that bank size, compliance with Sharia requirements and board size have a positive, significant effect on OpRiskDISC, while the number of bank branches and the proportion of independent members on the board have a negative, significant relationship with the disclosure level.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7378321
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2020-01/Difference%20between%20the%20determinants%20OE_0.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7378321. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.