Impact of Merger on Efficiency, Stability, and Competitiveness of Public Sector Banks


Aditya Kumar


This study examined whether the bank’s merger enhances competitiveness, stability, and an efficient banking system. Further, this paper examined the relationship between High-Powered Money and the six mentioned explanatory variables with the help of the Panel Data Model. We used the Reserve Bank of India dataset from 2009 to 2021 to explore the relationship. We observed that High-Powered Money has increased, and the closing balance of non-performing assets has decreased after the merger of the Indian banks. In addition, we have seen that high powered money has a positive and significant relationship with the capital-to-risk-weighted assets ratio and is negatively related to the Credit-Deposit Ratio and the Investment-Deposit Ratio. In addition, we observed that return on investments is positively associated with high powered money. These estimates show that Indian public sector banks have become competitive, financially stable, and efficient after the merger of banks. At the same time, we did not see a significant relationship between the return on investments and the Total Assets to Total Income Ratio.


How to Cite
Kumar, A. (2023). Impact of Merger on Efficiency, Stability, and Competitiveness of Public Sector Banks. Competition Commission of India Journal on Competition Law and Policy, 4(2), 111–134.


  1. Badi, H., et al. (2003). Fixed effects, random effects or Hausman-Taylor? A pretest estimator, Economics Letters. 79(3): 361-369. ISSN 0165-1765.
  2. Badri N. Rath. (2019). Does total factor productivity converge among ASEAN countries? Bulletin of Monetary Economics and Banking. Bank Indonesia Institute. Special Issue, January. p. 477-494.
  3. Berger, A., Klapper, L., and Turk-Ariss, R. (2008). Bank competition and financial stability. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4696.
  4. Bernanke, S., Gertler, M., Gilchrist, S. (1999). The financial accelerator in a quantitative business cycle framework, Handbook of Macroeconomics, Volume 1, Part C, p. 1341-1393.
  5. Bell, A., Fairbrother, M., & Jones, K. (2019). Fixed and random effects models: making an informed choice. Qual Quant. 53: 1051-1074.
  6. Borio, C., and H. Zhu. (2012). Capital Regulation, Risk-Taking, and Monetary Policy: A Missing Link in the Transmission Mechanism? Journal of Financial Stability. 8(4): 236-51.
  7. Boyd, J. and G. De Nicolo. (2005). The Theory of Bank Risk Taking Revisited. Journal of Finance. 60: 1329-1343.
  8. Boyd, J., G. De Nicolo, & A.M. Jalal. (2006) Bank risk-taking and competition revisited: New Theory and Evidence, IMF Working Paper, WP/06/297.
  9. Breusch T., & Pagan A. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies. 47(1): 239-253.
  10. Carletti, E. and P. Hartmann. (2003). Competition and Financial Stability: What is Special about Banking?
  11. CCI. (2021a). About CCI.
  12. CCI. (2021b). Competition Act.
  13. Delis, M. D., I. Hasan, & N. Mylonidis. (2011). The Risk-Taking Channel of Monetary Policy in the USA: Evidence from Micro Level Data. MPRA Paper No. 34084,
  14. Demsetz, R., M. R. Saidenberg, & P. E. Strahan. (1996). Banks with something to lose: The disciplinary role of franchise value, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review. 2(2): 1-14.
  15. De Nicolo, Gianni, and Elena Loukoianova. (2007). Bank Ownership, Market Structure, and Risk, International Monetary Fund, Washington, D. C.
  16. Djankov, S., R. La Porta, F. Lopez-de-Silanes and A. Shleifer. (2003). Courts, Quarterly Journal of Economics. p. 453-517.
  17. Djankov, S., McLeish, C. A. Shleifer. (2007). Private Credit in 129 Countries, Journal of Financial Economics. 84: 299-329.
  18. Hausman J. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica. 46(6): 1251-1272.
  19. Hellmann, T. F., K. Murdock & J. Stiglitz. (2000). Are capital requirements enough for liberalization, moral hazard in banking, and prudential regulation? American Economic Review. 90: 147-165.
  20. Ioannidou, V. P., S. Ongena, & J. L. Peydro. (2008). Monetary Policy and Subprime Lending: A Tall Tale of Low Federal Funds Rates, Hazardous Loans, and Reduced Loan Spreads.
  21. Jayadev, M., and Sensarma, R. (2007). Mergers in Indian Banking: An Analysis, CORE World’s largest aggregator of open access research papers.
  22. Jimenez, G., S. Ongena, J. L. Peydro, & J. Saurina. (2008). Hazardous times for monetary policy: What do twenty-three million bank loans say about the effects of monetary policy on credit risk-taking?
  23. Ministry of Finance, Merger of Public Sector Banks.
  24. Mishra, P. (2018). “Are Mergers and Acquisitions Necessarily Anti-competitive? Empirical Evidence from India’s Manufacturing Sector” Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, 12(3): 276-307.
  25. Keeley, M. C. (1990). Deposit Insurance, Risk, and Market Power in Banking, American Economic Review. 80(5): 1183-1200.
  26. Parida, Tapas., & Padhi, Debashis. (2018). Does Bank Competition Affect Financial Stability in Banking Sector: Some Empirical Evidence from India, CCI- The National Conference on Economics of Competition Law.
  27. Ramanathan, J. Stock Market Reaction to Regulatory Action on Anticompetitive Practices in India. (2021). Competition Commission of India Journal on Competition Law and Policy. Vol. 2: 45-70.
  28. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  29. Reserve Bank of India, List of Scheduled Commercial Banks (SCBs)
  30. Schaeck, K., and M. Cihak. (2007). Banking Competition and Capital Ratios, IMF Working Paper No. 07/216.
  31. Seenaiah. K., Badri N. Rath, & Amaresh S. (2015). “Determinants of Bank Profitability in the Post-reform Period: Evidence from India,” Global Business Review, International Management Institute. vol. 16(5_suppl): 82-92.