1 Introduction

The annual Bank Research Conference (BRC), introduced in 2000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Journal of Financial Services Research (JFSR), has grown to serve as a major forum for research economists, legislators, regulators, industry consultants, and industry representatives to critically debate important financial policy issues.

In this paper, we present the evolution of the BRC and its impact on both the policy and research communities. We begin by providing a history of the BRC, highlighting the differences between the BRC and other finance conferences. Then, we describe and examine the changes in the conference’s number of submissions and the rate of acceptance. Next, we present information about BRC participants, including a breakdown of participants by sector and country affiliation, and discuss the conference theme and topics covered. Finally, using quantitative information collected from Google Scholar, we measure the influence that the BRC has had on the banking and finance research literature.

We show that the conference has evolved to serve wider audiences and broader areas of interest. The conference has emphasized specific policy topics directly motivated by the core functions of the FDIC and, especially following the financial crisis of 2008, topics impacting the financial industry more broadly.

Increased outreach, greater attention on banking following the financial crisis, and the expansion of themes discussed during BRC meetings helped attract a large number of submissions and diverse participants representing the academic community and policymakers. The number of submissions increased from fewer than 100 in 2005 to over 400 in recent years. As a result, the acceptance rate for papers submitted for presentation at the conference is under 6 %.

We assess the impact of the BRC on the research community by looking at the publication history and citations of presented papers. More than 200 papers presented at the BRC have been published in 55 different peer-reviewed journals. The journals publishing BRC research are well-known for publishing high-quality research addressing financial industry policy issues. In addition, these papers are well cited. More than 80 papers have been cited over 100 times, 16 of which have been cited at least 500 times.

BRC presentations have also helped to inform policymaking. We highlight a few major regulatory rulemakings and describe aspects of selected BRC presentations that preceded those rulemakings. The presentations show that research presented at the BRC was concerned with issues of ongoing and subsequent interest to policymakers.

In Section 2, we discuss the history of the BRC, highlighting how the conference has evolved. In Section 3, we provide summary statistics on participants and research topics. In Section 4, we measure the impact the BRC had on the scholarly literature in finance and banking by analyzing the publication outlets and citation counts of the research papers presented at the BRC. In Section 5, we briefly discuss the connections between presentations at the BRC and important rulemakings. The final section summarizes and concludes.

2 History of the conference

The BRC has become a flagship activity of the FDIC’s Center for Financial Research (CFR). The Center was created to support and disseminate research on topics important to the FDIC’s mission, including bank supervision, deposit insurance, and the resolution of financial institutions. Researchers involved with the creation of the CFR felt there was a clear need to hold a regular conference to help expand the depth and breadth of banking research.

Backed by Donald Powell, the FDIC Chairman at the time, the creation of the CFR was announced at the second meeting of the BRC. Six senior fellows were chosen to help guide the fledgling center: Alan Blinder (Princeton University), Robert Jarrow (Cornell University), Edward Kane (Boston College), Randall Kroszner (University of Chicago), Frederic Mishkin (Columbia University), and Maureen O’Hara (Cornell University).

The founding members of the Center were Arthur Murton (FDIC), Frederick Carns (FDIC), Haluk Ünal (University of Maryland), and Mark Flannery (University of Florida), who served as the inaugural Director of the CFR. In a similar spirit to that underlying the creation of the conference, the CFR was founded on the belief that research should help guide policy decisions. Murton, then-FDIC Director of the Division of Insurance and Research, was instrumental in creating both the BRC and CFR. Murton envisioned “academics and industry representatives serv[ing] as sounding boards and provid[ing] valuable feedback on regulatory policies, and regulatory and industry economists help[ing] academics identify relevant research topics” (FDIC 2003).

Since the creation of the CFR, the BRC has been jointly organized by the CFR and the JFSR. While the conference was initially envisioned to be a biannual event, FDIC leadership saw how valuable the first meeting was to the banking community and decided to dedicate more resources to make it into an annual conference. Powell, Murton, Carns, and Ünal, as managing editor of the JFSR, led the push to make the BRC into an annual research conference.

The BRC was conceived purely as a research conference. There was never an expectation that a banking agency would use findings from a given paper presented at the conference directly for policy actions. Instead, the BRC reflected the goal that the regulatory process would be informed by research findings and the realization that the time between research findings and policy implementation can be long. The founders envisioned that continuous research would enhance policymakers’ understanding of the economics of regulatory issues and help guide the way they developed policy. Although it may be difficult to tie a particular research finding directly to a specific regulation, academic research is inherently embedded in the regulatory process.

In its early years, the BRC was organized around a theme reflecting a specific policy concern, such as “Incorporating Market Information into Financial Supervision” (2000) and “Issues in Securitization and Credit Risk Transfer” (2008).Footnote 1 As the conference developed, organizers began including subgroup topics in addition to the central theme.

2.1 Conference submissions and acceptance rate

Judging by paper submissions, there were two main shocks to the number of papers submitted for the BRC. First, the 2008 global financial crisis brought more attention to banking research and led to increased interest in the conference. Submissions roughly doubled pre-crisis to post-crisis (See Fig. 1). As we discuss later in Section 3, the content of the BRC also changed to reflect the key financial issues revealed by the financial crisis. The conference programs for early years of the BRC were focused on issues of core functional importance to the FDIC, including deposit insurance design, regulatory and supervisory effects on bank behavior, the determinants of bank lending, and the role of market information in evaluating bank activities. During the financial crisis, conference agendas shifted to reflect the broader mission of the FDIC, incorporating more general topics like bank responses to credit risk and consumer borrowing. Sessions devoted to aspects of systemic risk, bank capital, and capital regulation were commonly included on conference agendas post-crisis.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Conference Submissions Surrounding the Financial Crisis, 2005–2013 (Data on submissions prior to 2005 is unavailable)

The second shock occurred when the BRC moved towards broader topics of interest to wider audiences and expanded outreach about the conference. This change enabled the BRC to not only reach a larger, more diverse audience but also to expand the range of research topics presented, establishing the BRC as an attractive conference for many researchers to target when submitting their manuscripts for presentation. Conference organizers more systematically reached out to department chairs in economics and finance and to banking researchers across a variety of institutions, including international and regulatory institutions.

After 2010, paper submissions to the BRC increased four-fold. Despite the increase in submissions, conference organizers did not markedly increase the length of the conference and, instead, kept the number of accepted papers limited so that the conference could remain a two-day event. As a result, the acceptance rate for submitted papers plummeted, and currently averages under 6 % for the last five conferences. The BRC now receives around 400 submissions, of which approximately 20 are accepted for the conference’s main program (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Paper Submissions and Acceptances, 2005–2021

Recently, the conference has added Fast Track sessions in which selected papers are presented in an abbreviated format without discussants. Questions for the presenters take place outside the main conference room after the session has concluded. Typically, multiple conference participants join each presenter to engage in small group discussions about the presentation. To help cultivate nascent banking researchers, the conference now includes a Poster Session where graduate students present their work in the form of a large poster displayed during conference breaks.Footnote 2

Throughout the conference’s history, organizers have invited accomplished scholars to deliver keynote addresses. These speakers inform the audience about important developments in the field and highlight the implications for the banking industry.Footnote 3 For example, Raghuram Rajan discussed his work with Douglas Diamond on the role of money in banking in 2003. Following the financial crisis of 2008, several keynote speakers – such as Anil Kashyap and Douglas Diamond – emphasized the importance of bank regulation and supervision and provided policy recommendations. René Stulz, in 2014, talked about risk-taking and risk management in banks. More recently, Amit Seru highlighted how to conceptualize the regulation of banks when they face competition from fintech companies.

Submissions to the BRC undergo up to three rounds of review. In the first round, the conference organizing committee—made up of FDIC economists and the JFSR Managing Editor—reviews each submission to determine whether it fits within the conference’s topics and assess potential interest by the audience. Papers passing this round enter a second review by at least two FDIC staff economists charged with ensuring the quality of the analysis. Among other things, these reviewers consider the theoretical framework, empirical methodology, and suitability of the data. Conference organizers then review the assessments of the staff economists and organize the papers clearing the second-round review into broad topics. Collections of 12 to 18 papers within a broad topic are then reviewed externally.

A unique feature of the BRC is that external, third-round reviewers are also conference discussants and session chairs. Third-round reviewers are selected mainly from the associate editors of the JFSR. To help ensure accepted papers are selected objectively, identifying information is hidden from the papers. These reviewers select two or three papers to be presented at the BRC within a session that they will chair themselves. As session chairs, the external reviewers are already invested in the content of the selected papers. They include these papers in the program because the papers help advance the field’s knowledge of important issues. In their capacity as discussants of the chosen papers, third-round reviewers synthesize and critique the presented papers. They also explain how the research papers fit into the broader literature and relate them to each other and to existing work. In this way, third-round reviewers not only provide an additional quality check, but they also present the BRC audience with a big picture overview of the issues studied.

3 Summary statistics

From 2000 to 2019, 344 presentations were made across 19 BRCs.Footnote 4 Presentations were of ongoing research projects that economists aimed to publish in professional or academic journals and that were submitted and accepted for inclusion in the conference through the submission and review process.

BRC presenters were mainly from academic institutions (See Fig. 3). Seventy percent of the presenters since the conference’s inception represented academic institutions. Participants from central banks, including the Federal Reserve System, account for 17% of presenters. Six percent of presenters were from authorities and government agencies other than central banks, including the FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Representatives of international organizations who have presented at the BRC include the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and Bank of International Settlements. Representatives from private financial organizations also presented at the conference.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Bank Research Conference Presenters by Sector, 2000–2019

Most presenters were affiliated with U.S. institutions. Approximately two-thirds of U.S.-based presenters were from academic institutions, with a further 25% from central banks and governmental agencies (See Fig. 4). Of presenters from institutions outside the United States, most came primarily from Europe (panel B of Fig. 4). Presenters whose primary affiliation was outside the United States were largely academics.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Presenters’ Institutions by Origin

Table 1 lists the most frequent presenters and session chairs at the BRC. Panel A displays information on the most frequent paper presenters. These presenters are academics who have conducted extensive research on banking topics. Allen Berger has given the most presentations at the BRC, followed by Sanjiv Das, Robert Jarrow, and Viral Acharya.

Table 1 Leading Presenters of Research Papers, 2000–2019

Panel B provides information on the most frequent session chairs and discussants. Session chairs are accomplished researchers in banking and finance that selected the papers for the conference. They also serve as third-round reviewers and discussants for the sessions they create. George Pennacchi has served as a session chair most frequently, followed by Robert DeYoung and Mark Carey.

Conference agendas included a mix of topics of long-standing general interest and those of more immediate importance. Appendix 1 lists the conferences in reverse chronological order and the session titles for each conference. For the most part, each session featured three or fewer presentations. Appendix 2 categorizes each presentation within one of sixteen broad research topics. Table 2 displays the frequency of each research topic by year.Footnote 5 Some topics continue to be important at the BRC. For instance, “Lending,” “Capital,” and “Credit Risk” appear consistently throughout the conference’s history. (“Regulation/Supervision” and “Governance” also appear throughout the BRC’s history, though less commonly.) “Bank Risk Taking” bookends the financial crisis, suggesting that organizers and presenters actively discussed concerns about bank behavior before 2007. Conferences with greater emphasis on “Bank Risk Taking” in the pre-crisis years also focused on “Market Discipline/Information.” Conferences from 2008 to 2010 featured themes related to “Household Finance.” At the 2017 BRC, “fFintech” emerged as an active area of research.

Table 2 Conference Presentations by Research Theme, 2000–2019

The financial crisis altered the financial system in many ways. These changes are reflected in the presentations at the BRC. In Table 3, we divide the history of BRC presentations into a pre-crisis period from 2000 through 2008 and a post-crisis period from 2009 to 2019.Footnote 6 Perhaps owing to interest at the time in using market discipline to supplement traditional supervisory methods, “Market Discipline/Information” was the most prominent theme of BRC presentations during the pre-crisis years, yet it disappeared almost entirely from post-crisis conferences. This may reflect the failure of market discipline to prevent or significantly mitigate the impact of the financial crisis.Footnote 7 Conversely, “Financial Crisis,” “Real Effects,” and “Systemic Risk” emerged as active areas of research post-crisis. Presentations related to “Financial Crisis” reflected a desire to understand the impetus for the crisis, while those on “Real Effects” underscored a desire to understand the implications of the crisis. The financial crisis showed clearly that turbulence at financial firms can impose real and lasting harm to the rest of the economy. With the growth of “Systemic Risk” as a topic of study, researchers were seeking both an early-warning indicator of potential broad financial distress and a means to gauge the success of attempts to control such risk. Given the role that capital played in the financial crisis, “Capital” was a pervasive theme throughout the post-crisis years of the BRC.

Table 3 Conference Presentations by Research Theme, Pre-Crisis and Post-Crisis

The financial crisis of 2008 increased the need of researchers and policymakers to understand the role of bank regulation and supervision while evaluating new rules for the banking sector and economy. Consequently, more papers were presented on topics related to household finance from 2008 to 2010, which is not surprising given that the crisis had a considerable impact on households.Footnote 8 These papers attempted to understand the impact of the financial crisis on household debt and credit demand.

Governance issues loomed large during the crisis and throughout its aftermath. Commentators partly attributed the economic distress to misaligned incentives within financial institutions (Faulkender et al. (2010)). The 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) Capital Purchase Program included standardization and restrictions on executive compensation.Footnote 9 These senior executive officer compensation restrictions for companies participating in the Capital Purchase Program included clawback provisions for compensation derived from materially inaccurate statements, “golden parachute” blackout periods, and tax deduction limitations.Footnote 10

The BRC’s 2009 keynote address was delivered on this topic by Kenneth Feinberg, Special Master for Executive Compensation, and the conference hosted dedicated sessions on executive compensation and inside debt in 2011 and 2013, respectively. In these sessions, presenters studied how the structure of compensation induced risk-taking within financial institutions, identified potential sources of compensation risk, and described its effect on bank default.Footnote 11 The presenters highlighted the important role that deferral and clawback provisions may play in addressing excessive risk taking.

Finally, with the introduction of new technologies, such as blockchain and peer-to-peer lending platforms, scholarly research evolved to understand how these technologies were changing the financial industry. Consequently, the conference began featuring presentations on fintech topics.

4 Impact of the Bank Research Conference on the scholarly literature

To quantify the impact of the BRC on banking research, we examined whether papers presented at the conference were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals. A total of 344 papers have been presented at the BRC since its inception. We found publication information for 226 of those papers, of which a few are forthcoming.Footnote 12

Papers presented at the BRC have been published in 55 different journals. Table 4 lists the most common journals that published research presented at the BRC. Many journals on this list are known for publishing high-quality research addressing financial industry policy issues. The most common journal of publication is the JFSR, with 36 publications, followed by the Review of Financial Studies (RFS), with 27, and the Journal of Financial Economics (JFE), with 24.

Table 4 Most Common Publications for Papers Presented at the Bank Research Conference

In the early years of the BRC, the JFSR occasionally dedicated special issues to presentations at the conference. For example, in 2001, the JFSR published a special issue on market discipline in banking following the BRC meeting on the same topic. Six presentations from the BRC were featured in this issue. When the JFSR published a special issue on “Basel II: Challenges for Implementation,” five of the presentations at the BRC were included. Five papers presented at the BRC also made up the 2012 JFSR special issue for the 10th FDIC/JFSR Bank Research Conference.

Table 5 shows that although the JFSR was the primary outlet for papers presented in the early years of the conference, BRC research garnered the attention of other outlets after the financial crisis. This is possibly due to greater interest in banking research among general interest journals. Between 2011 and 2015, the JFE was the primary outlet for papers presented at the conference. By 2016, the JFE remained a common outlet, but the RFS had supplanted it as the most common journal of publication for papers presented at the BRC.

Table 5 Number of Presented Papers Published in Various Journals by Year

We compiled citation count data for published papers using Google Scholar. Judging by these data, research presented at the BRC is valued highly within the banking and finance profession. More than 80 papers have been cited over 100 times, 16 of which have been cited at least 500 times. Table 6 presents the ten most-cited papers presented at the BRC. It shows that the papers with the most citations attempt to understand the causes of bank risk-taking behavior. In particular, three of the four most-cited papers study governance issues.

Table 6 Ten Most-Cited Papers

Naturally, rankings of absolute counts of citations skew in favor of papers presented in the early years of the BRC. To counteract this tendency, we produced annual citation numbers based upon the year of publication for papers published before 2021 (Table 7). We divided each paper’s total citations by the number of years since its publication year. Three of the five most-cited papers annually were not among the five most-cited papers overall, suggesting annualized citation data identified papers that quickly established themselves as seminal contributions to the literature.

Table 7 Ten Most-Cited Publications Using Annualized Citation Data

5 Connection of the conference to the regulatory process

Many of the most significant regulations implemented since the financial crisis contain content discussed at the BRC before the rulemakings were implemented. Figure 5 depicts the timing of some consequential regulatory actions dealing with banking and the financial system. Highlighted items in black boxes were identified by the authors as being among the most significant within this sample.Footnote 13 In this section we briefly describe four rulemakings that include content discussed at the BRC before the rule’s implementation.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Timeline of Significant Financial Regulatory Actions, 2008–2016

In January 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a rule to protect consumers from certain types of mortgage lending by requiring that lenders comply with ability-to-repay requirements.Footnote 14 These requirements established documentation requirements for borrower employment, income, assets, and debt obligations. At the 2008 BRC, “Credit Booms and Lending Standards: Evidence from the Subprime Mortgage Market” by Giovanni Dell’Ariccia, Deniz Igan, and Luc Laeven linked the subprime mortgage crisis to a decline in lending standards. The presentation showed that lending standards declined to a greater extent in areas that experienced faster credit growth before the crisis. One year later, illustrating the diversity of academic findings on policy issues, “Where is the Smoking Gun? A Study of Underwriting Standards for U.S. Subprime Mortgages” by Geetesh Bhardwaj and Rajdeep Sengupta, took issue with the claim that underwriting standards deteriorated post-2004. They found no evidence of a dramatic weakening of subprime lending standards using loan-level data.

One of the most significant regulatory changes over the past two decades concerned the implementation of the Basel III risk-based capital framework.Footnote 15 The July 2013 rulemaking increased risk-based capital requirements, tightened the definition of regulatory capital, altered the risk-weights assigned to certain types of credit exposures held by banks, and implemented the statutory prohibition against references to credit ratings in regulation.

Presentations at the BRC discussed aspects of these issues before the rulemaking. In 2008, “Optimal Credit Risk Transfer, Monitored Finance, and Banks” by Gabriella Chiesa discussed the theoretical design of risk-based capital requirements. Mark Carlson (in work with Hui Shan and Missaka Warusawitharana) presented “Capital Ratios and Bank Lending: A Matched Bank Approach” in 2011, which empirically examined the impact of bank capital ratios on bank loan growth. Also in 2011, “Capital Regulation and Tail Risk” by Enrico Perotti, Lev Ratnovski, and Razvan Vlahu discussed bank responses to risk mitigation through capital regulation and the implications for optimal capital regulation design.

The topic of credit ratings played a prominent role in several BRC presentations, including “The Subprime Credit Crisis of 2007” by Michel G. Crouhy, Robert A. Jarrow, and Stuart M. Turnbull (presented in 2008) on rating agency incentive problems. The 2009 BRC included several presentations related to credit ratings, including “MBS Ratings and the Mortgage Credit Boom”Footnote 16 by Adam Ashcraft, Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham, and James Vickery who empirically examined the role of credit ratings for subprime mortgages in the financial crisis. Also in 2009, “Credit Rating Accuracy and Incentives” by Robert A. Jarrow and Liheng Xu, and “Credit-Rating Shopping, Selection and the Equilibrium Structure of Ratings” by Francesco Sangiorgi, Jonathan Sokobin, and Chester Spatt considered the microstructure of credit ratings that result in inaccurate ratings. In 2012, Giuliano Iannotta presented “Bank Regulation, Credit Ratings, and Systematic Risk”Footnote 17 (with George Pennacchi), arguing that regulations based upon credit ratings can push banks towards systemically risky investments.

Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act, more commonly referred to as the Volcker Rule, prohibited banking organizations from undertaking proprietary trading and from sponsoring certain types of hedge funds and private equity funds.Footnote 18 Before the rule’s finalization in late 2013, presentations at the 2012 and 2013 BRCs considered the role of trading assets and proprietary trading activities on bank functions and performance. “Banking and Trading” by Arnoud W.A. Boot, and Lev Ratnovski (presented in 2012) discussed banks allocating too much capital to easily scalable proprietary trading activities instead of less scalable relationship lending. “How Does Bank Trading Activity Affect Performance? An Investigation Before and After the Crisis” by Michael R. King, Nadia Massoud, and Keke Song (presented in 2013) described their finding that trading activities were positively correlated with riskiness, negatively correlated with profitability, and associated with greater contribution to systemic risk.

In late 2014, six federal agencies implemented a statutory requirement by jointly approving a risk retention rule requiring securitizers to retain at least 5% of the credit risk of their securitizations on their balance sheets.Footnote 19 In 2010, “Differences across Originators in CMBS Loan Underwriting” by Lamont K. Black, Chenghuan Sean Chu, Andrew Cohen, and Joseph B. Nichols argued that moral hazard caused by a lack of warehousing risk negatively affects the quality of underwritten loans. Balance sheet lenders, on the other hand, underwrote higher quality loans according to the paper.

Aspects of numerous other regulatory rulemakings were discussed at the BRC before their final approval. In this way, BRC presentations achieved the goal from the BRC’s founding to encourage and disseminate research while helping to imbue a deeper understanding of the relevant economics issues throughout the regulatory process.

6 Conclusion

The Bank Research Conference was created in 2000 on the belief that research should help inform and guide policy decisions. It has become the flagship activity of the Center for Financial Research since the center’s creation in 2003. Given the lag between a manuscript’s submission and its final publication, the CFR/BRC’s founders hoped policymakers could use research presented at the conference to broaden their understanding of the economics of regulatory issues. Over time, the conference has evolved and become a major forum for policymakers, academics, and other researchers to discuss broader issues regarding the regulation and supervision of financial institutions. The BRC has become one of the leading conferences in the world dedicated to understanding banking-related issues.

In recognition of the 20th anniversary of the BRC, this study provides a brief history of the BRC and an evaluation of its impact. The scope of the BRC has changed during the conference’s history, enabling it to tap into broader banking topics for paper submissions and attract a broader audience of conference participants. Acceptance for presentation at the BRC is highly competitive with an acceptance rate under 6% over the last five conferences.

Both through keynote speeches and the research topics considered for presentation, the BRC has enhanced policymakers’ understanding of regulatory and supervisory issues. Throughout the BRC’s history, we observe that key aspects of regulatory and supervisory rules have been discussed in conference presentations prior to and following rulemakings. By disseminating research that has helped policymakers better understand the banking sector and its impact on financial stability, the BRC has helped advance former FDIC Chairman Donald Powell’s vision of “original, focused research lead[ing] to sound policy decisions” (FDIC 2003).

The impact of the BRC on the research community can been seen in the many papers that were presented at the conference and subsequently published in leading economics, finance, and banking journals. The breadth of this impact has expanded over time. In the first five years of the BRC, only one journal published multiple papers that were presented at the conference. In the most recent five years, 13 journals have published multiple papers that were presented at the BRC, with seven journals publishing at least five such papers. The quality of the research presented at the BRC is evidenced by many of these publications being highly cited within the research community. Five papers have been cited over 1000 times already, and nine papers are currently averaging over 100 citations per year.

Over its first twenty years, the BRC has succeeded in bringing together leading economists to discuss financial topics and their connection to current policy issues. Growing in stature and scope from its inception, the BRC is poised to continue making important contributions to banking and finance research over the next twenty years.