REVIEW ON THE PRODUCTIVE EFFICIENCY OF BANKS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY.pdf

Journal for Studies in Management and Planning
Available at
http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
Available online: http://edupediapublications.org/journals/index.php/JSMaP/ P a g e | 296
Review on the Productive Efficiency of Banks in
Developing Country
BHADRAPPA
Research Scholar
Department of commerce and management
OPJS University Churu Rajasthan
Guide Name is
Dr.Shrawan kumar saini
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF commerce AND management
OPJS UNIVERSITY CHURU Rajasthan
ABSTRACT
Banks are found to have substantially lower average efficiency than indicated by previous studies.
Efficiency is determined by sample size, the number of inputs and outputs of the model, the choice
of input and outputs and the degree of homogeneity of the sample. Homogeneity appears to be one
of the stronger drivers of average efficiency. Some intermediation models may be biased toward
finding higher average efficiency and lack criteria to determine whether the intermediation
process is profitable. The average bank is found to be competitive, but the low average efficiency
scores found seems to be a result of a small percentage of banks that temporarily manage to attain
some degree of super-efficiency. The inputs and the outputs used in data envelopment analysis are
standardized by utilizing accounting definitions and foundational finance concepts. This allows
modeling a bank’s productive process for the measurement of total productive efficiency and
provides a way to include the profitability of a bank productivity process. This standardized model
can then be extended to analyze other industries. The Indian banking sector, which was
predominantly controlled by the government, was liberalized in early 1990s. The resultant
competitive forces, coupled with more stringent regulatory framework, have created pressure on
the banks to perform. Efficiency has become critical for banks’ survival and growth. This paper
analyzes the performance of the Indian banking sector, measured and compared in two stages:
Through the construct of productive efficiency using the non-parametric frontier methodology,
DEA and finding the determinants of productive efficiency through TOBIT model. Inputs and
outputs are measured in monetary value and efficiency scores determined for the period 1999-
2003. The study shows that SBI and its group have the highest efficiency, followed by private
banks, and the other nationalized banks. The results are consistent over the period, but efficiency
differences diminish over period of time. The capital adequacy ratio is found to have a significantly
positive impact on the productive efficiency. In this thesis we study about the Productive Efficiency
of Banks & Financial Institution in India.

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
INTRODUCTION
The performance of the financial institutions is a major concern for both, the regulators and the
policy makers, since it has a strong linkage with the performance of the economy. The financial
sector is reasonably well developed in India. Though small in comparison to, say, USA, it has a
strong banking system, a set of large and small stock and commodity exchanges, strong equity
culture, large number of mutual funds, development institutions like Industrial Development Bank
of India, non-Banking finance companies, other specialized financial institutions, besides a large
informal sector. India, since 1950s chose the mixed economy model, with strong emphasis on
public sector.
The banking sector comprises three major segments: Scheduled Commercial banks, State
Cooperative banks, and other banks like NABARD. The scheduled commercial banks include all
major banks and account for more than 98% of all the assets in the banking sector. The Indian
banking industry, which is a major channel of funding the productive sector, was largely in the
private sector until 1969 when all the major Indian banks in private sector were nationalized.
Another set of banks was nationalized in 1980s. Several private sector banks and some foreign
banks did operate, but on a relatively small scale. By 2009, most banking assets were in public
sector. Facing major economic crisis, India started liberalizing its economy in 2009, reducing or
eliminating controls on many sectors, and allowing private sector to participate where it wasearlier
either denied or restricted. Financial sector, including banking sector was also liberalized. The
government also decided to streamline the capital market, which was hitherto monopolized by one
major stock exchange. A major new stock exchange and new regulatory body were established.
In 2010, the government constituted a committee under Dr. Narsimhan, to study and recommend
reforms for the banking sector. Consequent on the recommendations, a series of reforms were
introduced. The government allowed new private sector to enter the banking sector from 2000,
and further, the foreign banks from 1994. Several new private sector banks were established in
1994-2005 period and several foreign banks established their branches or expanded existing
network. The government also introduced more stringent and rigorous controls in line with Basle-
I.
As a result of three major factors, more liberalized banking sector, stronger regulatory framework,
and stronger capital market as a competitor, the banking sector has undergone a major
metamorphosis in the last decade with public sector dominance and protection giving way to a
competitive industry. New opportunities have also arisen in form of fund-based activity, and move
towards universal banking. The Indian banks, which have long been protected, are suspected to be
less efficient. the private sector bank (including foreign banks) deposits have increased from 10.3
percent of total deposits with the scheduled banks in 2000 to 21.8 percentin 2004-2005. The

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
increase is largely due to contribution of new private sector banks, e.g., HDFC and ICICI bank.
Net profits to total assets, net NPA to total assets and business per employee are lowest for public
sector banks. Share of private sector banks in the total profits has increased from 19.5 per cent in
2011-12 to 26.4 percent in 2014-15. In fact, if old private sector banks (which existed before 1991
and which are generally small and inefficient) were excluded, the performance of the private sector
banks would be even stronger. It is apparent that a strong and viable banking sector has emerged
and banks that do not perform will not survive for long.
The Indian Banking framework is interesting and maybe has no parallel in the managing an
account history of any nation on the planet. Subsequently, it is fascinating to think about the
development of Indian managing an account in the course of the most recent couple of decades, as
far as association, capacities, asset assembly, financial job, issues and arrangements. The most
recent couple of decades saw numerous full scale financial improvements, money related and
managing an account approaches and the outside circumstance, which impacted the advancement
of Indian saving money in various routes and in various periods. Thus, it is helpful to dissect in
some detail the development of Indian managing an account with reference to some particular
stages. The principal stage covers the period from development period to 1968 and the second
stage from 1990 to 2000. These two periods comprise the past. The time of managing an account
changes starting with 1992 and till date might be viewed as the present or the present stage with
the end goal of this examination. It is the present stage, which gives the premise to investigating
the eventual fate of Indian saving money framework
The economic theory of the firm assumes that production takes place in an environment in which
managers attempt to maximize profits by operating in the most efficient manner possible. The
competitive model suggests that firms which fail to do so will be driven from the market by more
efficient ones. However, when natural entry barriers or regulation weaken competitive forces,
inefficient firms may continue to prosper. That is, true firm behavior may vary from that implied
by the competitive model as managers attempt to maximize their own well-being instead of profits,
or find that they are not required to operate very efficiently to remain in business. Variations from
productive efficiency can be broken down into input and output induced inefficiencies. By input
inefficiency we mean that, for a given level of output, the firm is not optimally using the factors
of production. Overall input inefficiency resulting from the suboptimal use of inputs can be
decomposed into allocative and pure technical inefficiency. Allocative inefficiency occurs when
inputs are combined in sub-optimal proportions. Regulation is typically given as a major reason
for this occurrence. Pure technical inefficiency occurs when more of each input is used than should
be required to produce a given level of output. This occurrence is more difficult to explain, but is
typically attributed to weak competitive forces which allow management to "get away" with
slackened productivity. Combining these two notions of inefficiency we get the overall

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
inefficiency resulting from the improper use of inputs.' The distinction between the two types of
inefficiency is important because they may be caused by totally different forces.
Productive efficiency requires optimizing behavior with respect to outputs as well as inputs. With
respect to outputs, optimal behavior necessitates production of the level and combination of
outputs corresponding to the lowest per unit cost production process. An optimal output level is
possible if economies and diseconomies of scale exist at different output levels. Economies of
scale exist if, over a given range of output, per unit costs decline as output increases. Increases in
per unit cost correspond to decreasing returns to scale. A scale efficient firm will produce where
there are constant returns to scale; that is, changes in output result in proportional changes in costs.
Because it involves the choice of an inefficient level, scale inefficiency is considered a form of
technical inefficiency. Thus total technical inefficiency includes both pure technical and scale
inefficiency; that is, inefficient levels of both inputs and outputs.
Additional cost advantages may result from producing more than one product. For example, a firm
may be able to jointly produce two or more outputs more cheaply than producing them separately.
If the cost of joint production is less than the cost resulting from independent production processes,
economies of scope are said to exist. Diseconomies of scope exist if the joint production costs are
actually higher than specialized or stand-alone production of the individual products.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Singh (2012) completed an extensive study to break down the patterns in the efficiency of the
Indian managing an account industry. The State Bank of India and its auxiliaries alongside other
nationalized banks were considered for analysis. He performed cross sectional and between
worldly analysis based on 17 markers. The outcomes demonstrated that every one of the banks
under study indicated enhancement in their profitability with the exception of the UCO bank,
which indicated decrease in efficiency. One of the principal distributed examinations utilizing non-
parametric creation wilderness approach was Noulas and Ketkar (2010) who utilized
intermediation approach and decided the specialized and scale proficiency of open division banks
for 2010. They discovered normal specialized wastefulness of 3.75 percent, of which 66% was
because of scale wastefulness. The study distinguished that unadulterated specialized effectiveness
was 1.5 percent and scale wastefulness was 2.25 percent and none of the banks were working under
diminishing comes back to scale.
Athma and Srinivas (2011) led a study to dissect the efficiency in business banks in India gather
savvy (open part banks, private segment banks and outside banks) for the period 1982 to 1995. All
the three bank bunches tried endeavors to enhance their efficiency in 1994– 95 and prevailing with
regards to gaining benefits by recuperating the agent costs completely. The study reasoned that the
productive tasks provoke recuperations, appropriate examination of credit risks and evasion of

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
risky ventures are the way to benefit in keeping money. Das (2010) contemplated specialized,
allocative and scale productivity of various open division banks for the period 1990– 96 utilizing
DEA under intermediation approach. The efficiencies were determined for every year for every
one of the banks. The study discovered decrease in general effectiveness after some time - decrease
in specialized proficiency with slight enhancement in allocative productivity. Subsequently,
change in wastefulness was because of specialized wastefulness rather allocative wastefulness.
The State Bank was observed to be more effective than other open area banks.
Das (2010) investigated the specialized and allocative effectiveness of 27 open segment banks
utilizing cross-sectional information for the year 2010– 11. It was discovered that open segment
banks had the extent of creating 1.23 occasions as much yield from similar data sources. Further,
the wastefulness that showed up out in the open segment banks was more an aftereffect of both
specialized and allocative wastefulness. The study found a negative connection between non-
performing resources and proficiency and size and productivity.
Buddy et al., (2000) inspected the efficiency of 68 noteworthy Indian commercial banks for the
year 1999. Yield arranged DEA demonstrate was utilized to locate the general proficiency of
Indian banks. The outcomes demonstrated that 16 banks were CCR (steady come back to scale)
proficient (productivity =1). The normal proficiency figure for the banks turned out as 0.9. Around
45 banks had effectiveness rating more prominent than 0.9 and out of these 50 percent were private
banks. They presumed that the exclusive banks performed superior to the remote claimed banks.
Saha and Ravishankar (2000) evaluated profitability of 25 open part Indian commercial banks
for the period 1992 to 1994 and analyzed the proficiency of people in general division banks in
two stages utilizing transitional approach. The outcomes acquired demonstrated that the
exhibitions of people in general division banks (except for the few) had enhanced over the study
time frame. Syed (2001) connected DEA method to examine saving money segment proficiency
in the post change period of 1993– 98 utilizing intermediation approach. The example comprised
of 37 banks out of which 18 were household possessed while 19 were remote claimed and tried
for factor profitability development utilizing Malmquist efficiency file. The general normal
wastefulness for the example of banks more than six-year time frame ended up being roughly 20
percent. The poor execution of managing an account part was because of poor execution of genuine
segment, as opposed to the other way around.
Janki (2002) investigated the impact of innovation on the efficiency of workers utilizing DEA for
the period 1986– 91. The study found that open area banks had the most noteworthy productivity
pursued by outside banks. The private banks were observed to be the minimum productive. They
likewise found a worldly enhancement in the execution of outside banks. Nath et al., (2002)
considered proficiency of 68 commercial banks working in India for the period 1998– 99 utilizing

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
DEA method. The outcome demonstrated that the private commercial banks have the higher
proficiency figure and minimum variety though the outside claimed banks shows the slightest
normal effectiveness figure and most extreme variety. The general population area commercial
banks come in the middle.
Kumbhakar and Sarkar (2003) broke down the connection among deregulation and aggregate
factor profitability (TFP) development in the Indian managing an account industry utilizing a
summed up shadow cost work approach. TFP development was deteriorated into innovative
changes, scale and random segment. A disaggregated board information analysis utilizing the
number of inhabitants openly and private banks over 1985– 96 which cover both pre and post-
deregulation period demonstrated that with a noteworthy decrease in administrative and
deregulation, the private area banks have enhanced their exhibitions for the most part because of
the opportunity to grow yield while open segment banks have not reacted to the deregulation
measures.
Misra (2003) analyzed whether allocative productivity of the Indian saving money framework had
enhanced after the presentation of budgetary division changes in the mid-1990s. Allocative
productivity had been considered for 23 conditions of India for two periods 1981– 1992 and 1993–
2001, extensively relating to the pre and post-changes periods. The analysis conveyed under board
co-reconciliation structure uncovered that generally speaking allocative productivity of the
managing an account framework had nearly multiplied in the post-change period. Result proposed
that while allocative productivity of bank's assets conveyed in the administrations segment had
enhanced that in the agribusiness and industry had disintegrated in the post-change period for
larger part of the states. Appraisals of flexibility of yield concerning credit enhanced from 0.30
amid the period 1981– 1991 to 0.35 amid 1992– 2001 showing as enhancement in the allocative
effectiveness of the saving money framework at the all India level.
Naidu and Nair (2003) inspected whether the specialized productivity of planned commercial
banks in India had enhanced after the usage of Narasimham Committee proposals utilizing
stochastic generation boondocks approach. The time of the study was 1988– 89 to 1990– 91 and
1991– 92 to 1998– 99. The outcome demonstrated that the specialized proficiency levels of open
sector banks had recorded a decrease in the post-advancement period while the specialized
effectiveness levels of both residential private and outside banks enhanced somewhat. The
distinctions in the specialized effectiveness levels among bank bunches had declined in the post-
advancement period showing upgraded rivalry among bank gatherings.
Slam Mohan and Ray (2003) have contemplated profitability and proficiency of open and private
sector banks in India, utilizing DEA, for the period 1992– 2000.They examined 27 open sector, 21
old private sector and 14 outside banks. They utilized three measures: Tornquist add up to factor

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
profitability development, Malmquist proficiency file and income augmentation effectiveness.
They accepted CRS innovation and utilized intermediation approach. Just outside banks
demonstrated an enhancement in specialized proficiency while both open and private firms
demonstrated a decay. Additionally the normal level of specialized productivity was essentially
higher for remote banks (0.331 percent) contrasted with the PSBs (- 0.075 percent). They observed
open sector banks to be progressively proficient and beneficial contrasted with their private sector
rivals.
Sathye (2003) analyzed the deliberate variety in the execution and along these lines the profitable
proficiency of Indian commercial banks for the year 1997– 98 incorporated by the Indian Banks'
Association (IBA, 1999). The effectiveness had been determined utilizing variable comes back to
scale (VRS) input situated model of the DEA methodology. To gauge proficiency as specifically
as could be expected under the circumstances, two info and two yield factors, to be specific,
intrigue costs, non-intrigue costs (information sources) and net intrigue salary and non-intrigue
pay (yields) have been utilized (alluded to as Model A). A second DEA analysis was kept running
with stores and staff numbers as sources of info and net advances and non-intrigue salary as yields
(alluded to as Model B). In the Model B, where a less immediate approach was taken to quantify
effectiveness, stores supplant intrigue cost, staff numbers supplant non-intrigue costs and net
advances progress toward becoming intermediary for net intrigue pay. The two models have been
utilized to demonstrate how productivity scores contrast when sources of info and yields are
changed. The study found that the mean productivity score of Indian banks (0.83 percent) contrasts
well and the world mean proficiency score and the effectiveness of private sector commercial
banks as a gathering might have been, incomprehensibly lower than that of open sector banks and
outside banks in India. The study demonstrated that according to Model A, people in general sector
banks (0.83) have a higher mean productivity score when contrasted with the private sector and
outside commercial banks in India. According to Model B, they have bring down mean proficiency
score (0.62) than the remote banks yet at the same time higher than private sector commercial
banks.
De (2004) utilized an econometric approach to decide the specialized effectiveness of the Indian
banks and inspected the connection among proprietorship and proficiency and effect of changes
on productivity. Board information for the years 1985– 1996 were utilized and a stochastic
boondocks generation work was fitted to the information. The general finding was that saving
money industry was technically wasteful. The normal wastefulness levels differed from 55 percent
and 20 percent for the two yield estimates utilized in the study. Specialized proficiency had
expanded in the post-advancement for just 14 banks out of 18 banks and for more than two-third
of the banks in the example specialized productivity was steady over the period. Slam and Ray
(2004) endeavored a correlation between open sector banks and their private sector partners
dependent on proportions of efficiency that utilization amounts of yields and sources of info. They

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
utilized two proportions of profitability: Malmquist add up to factor efficiency development and
have endeavored examinations over the period 2010-2015, contrasting PSBs and both household
private and remote banks. Out of an aggregate of four correlations made, there were no distinctions
in three cases, PSBs improve the situation in two and outside banks in one. To say it in an
unexpected way, open sector banks supposedly was off guard in just a single out of six
examinations. It was troublesome, subsequently, to support the recommendation that proficiency
and profitability have been bring down openly sector banks in respect to their companions in the
private sector.
Shanmugam and Das (2004) separated the efficiency of 94 banks having a place with four
particular belonging bundles in India in the midst of 2010-2015 using stochastic backwoods age
appear. The dealing with a record industry had exhibited a headway to the extent capability of
raising non-premium pay, adventures and credits. The adequacy upgrade was noteworthy by virtue
of premiums in all banks particularly in private banks. Along these lines, the result matches with
the fiscal improvement focus of the change measure. It was found that the State Bank gathering
(48.7 – 51.4 percent) and outside banks (38.7– 41.3 percent) were more capable than their
accomplices. Regardless, they found that there were up 'til now greater gaps between the certifiable
and potential presentations of banks.
Chakrabarti and Chawla (2005) associated DEA to survey the general capability of Indian banks
in the midst of the period 2010-2015. They utilized two models to decide input-yield vectors and
named these models as "sum" and "regard" approaches. The outcomes of the study recommended
that on the "regard" bases, the outside banks as a social occasion have been astonishingly more
viable than all other bank groups sought after by the Indian private banks. In any case, from the
"sum" perspective (volume of stores and credit), private banks seem to do the best while the outside
banks were the most detectably awful performers. Further, publicsector banks have, in connection
falled behind their private accomplices to the extent execution.
Das and Ghosh (2005) examined the capability and assessed the interrelationships among credit
risk, capital and productivity change in the Indian setting, using the data on state-had banks (SOBs)
for the period 1995– 96 to 2000– 01, where credit risk was evaluated by the extent of net non-
performing advances to net advances. The results exhibited that higher productivity prompts a
decrease in credit risk and besides there was a positive association among benefit and bank
capitalization. This finding reinforced how poor performers were more disposed to risk taking than
better performing dealing with a record affiliations.
Das and Ray (2005) tentatively evaluated and explored diverse capability scores of Indian banks
in the midst of 1997– 2003 using DEA. It was seen that Indian banks are so far next to no isolated
in regards to information or yield masterminded specific capability and cost efficiency. In any

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
case, they differentiate distinctly in respect of pay and advantage efficiencies. Obviously, salary
rather than cost accepted a staggering activity in choosing advantage efficiency of Indian banks.
Bank size, proprietorship, and being recorded on the stock exchange were a segment of the factors
that emphatically influence ordinary advantage capability and somewhat, salary adequacy scores.
Ataullah and Le (2006) using the Indian setting aside extra cash industry as a logical examination
proposed and attempted theories as for the probability of an association between three segments
of the Economic Reforms (ERs) – specifically, money related changes, budgetary changes and
private endeavor progression and bank profitability in making countries. Bank efficiency was
assessed using DEA. The association between the conscious viability and distinctive bank express
characteristics and biological parts related with the budgetary changes was broke down using the
OLS and GMM estimations. The results exhibited an upgrade in the adequacy of banks especially
that of remote banks, after the money related changes. The study found a positive association
between the level of contention and bank efficiency. In any case a negative association between
the proximity of outside banks and bank capability was found, which was attributed to a short-run
increase in costs as a result of the introduction of new setting aside extra cash development by
remote banks. Moreover, the study found that financial shortages oppositely affect bank
profitability. Regardless, the results similarly prescribed that the gap between the capability of
open sector banks and private sector banks declined in the midst of the post-monetary changes
period. Chatterjee and Sinha (2006) assessed input orchestrated concentrated and scale
profitability of the Indian commercial banks using the DEA under factor returns to scale and free
exchange body approaches exclusively.
Das et al., (2006) experimentally examined the execution of Indian commercial managing an
account amid the post change period 2010-2015. utilizing DEA. Three distinct approaches to be
specific; intermediation approach, esteem included approach and working approach have been
utilized to separate how productivity scores shift with changes in data sources and yields. The
analysis connects the variety in determined efficiencies to a lot of factors, i.e., bank estimate,
possession, capital sufficiency proportion, non-performing credits and the executive’s quality. A
multivariate analysis dependent on the logit display recommend that medium-sized open sector
banks performed well and were bound to work at more elevated amounts of specialized
productivity. A cozy relationship was seen among productivity and soundness as dictated by bank's
capital sufficiency proportion. The exact outcomes additionally demonstrated that technically
increasingly effective banks were having less non performing advances.
Raojibhai (2006) endeavored to conquer any hindrance between ID of productivity demonstrating
factors independently for all the three sectors. Thus 23 factors were gathered under three factors
specifically, productivity factors identified with per branch, proficiency factors identified with
activities and effectiveness factors affecting extreme benefits. Out of the booked commercial

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
banks, five banks from every sector were chosen as delegate bets based on size of stores for the
year 2006. The 'per branch' sub-factors impact fundamentally the general productivity of open
sector banks. Proficiency factors identified with per branch don't assume critical job in affecting
the productivity of outside sector banks.
CONCLUSION
The execution measurements as far as bookkeeping, efficiency and profitability measurements for
banks are of essential significance for chiefs and strategy creators. The execution assessment of
banks gives essential data to the speculators that settle on choices for the potential and future
hazard related with banks. Therefore, the outcomes drawn from the present commitment give
essential arrangement suggestions to the proficient administration of operational exercises
attempted by open, private and remote part banks. Following are ends seen in the present setting.
It has been seen that as far as money related advancement record amid the ongoing time frame
India does not rank high. The information gathered from the reports given by Reserve Bank of
India as "Essential s in Statist India" uncovers that the rate share o the most recent two decades,
though, enhancements have been measured as far as rate offer of branches in semi-urban, urban
and metropolitan areas amid post-deregulation period. While deciding possession astute branch
extension, private and remote division bank bunches portray an expansion in the rate share for
branch organizing in India which indicates positive impact of monetary changes. It is evident from
the measurements that the keeping money part in India has not had valuable effect on every one
of the portions of populace. The additions have not came to the provincial territories and has
restricted essentially to metropolitans, urban and semi-urban regions as it were.
REFRENCES
1. Singh (2012) "Modeling lntemational Price Relationships and Interdependencies between
EU Stock Index and Stock Index Futures Markets: A Multivariate Analysis," Working
Paper, Centre for Empirical Research in Finance, Department of Economics and Finance,
University of Durham.
2. Athma and Srinivas (2011), "Study of the Potential for Commodity Exchanges and Other
Forms of Market Places in Eastern and Southern Africa", 2"d Extraordinary Session of the
Conference of Ministers of Trade, United Republic of Tanzania.
3. Das (2010). An Analysis of Efficiency and Productivity Growth of the Indian Banking
Sector. Finance India , XVII : 511-521

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
4. Buddy et al., (2000). Indian Banking- Achieving Excellence via Good Governance.
Bankers Conference Proceedings, November, 66-71
5. Saha and Ravishankar (2000), "Commodity Derivatives Market in India: Development,
Regulation and Future Prospects", International Research Journal of Finance and
Economics; Issue 2, pp 153-162.
6. Janki (2002), "On modelling and pricing weather derivatives", Applied Mathematics
Finance, Vol. 9, Issue 1, pp 1-20.
7. Kumbhakar and Sarkar (2003). Diversification in Baning Sector in India : Determinants
of Financial Performance. The Indian Journal of Commerce , 1 (3) : 13-21
8. Misra (2003). Corporate Governance in Transformation Times. IBA Bulletin, 25 (3) : 65-
70
9. Naidu and Nair (2003). Trends and composition of Bank Credit in India. Finance India ,
XIX : 493-512
10. Slam Mohan and Ray (2003). Service Quality Perception in Banks: An Indian
Perspective. Prajnan , XXXIII : 321-335
11. Sathye (2003). Evaluating Performance of Banks through CAMEL Model: A Case Study
of SBI and ICICI. The ICFAI Journal of Bank Management, V :49-63
12. De (2004) Boitumelo, M., & Narayana, N. 2010. The Performance of Financial Institutions
in Bostwana: A study of selected Banking and Non-Banking Financial Institutions. Asian-
African Journal of Economics and Econometrics, 10-15
13. Shanmugam and Das (2004). Measuring bank performance: An application of DEA.
Prajnan , XXXII : 287-304
14. Chakrabarti and Chawla (2005). Internet Banking-Benefits and Challenges in an
Emerging Economy. International Journal of Research in Business Management, 1 : 19-
26.
15. Das and Ghosh (2005). Service Quality in Commercial Banks: A Comparative Study.
Paradigm, VII: 24-36
16. Das and Ray (2005). Performance of New Private Sector Banks in India. The Indian
Journal of Commerce, 611-11.

Available at
ISSN: 2395-0463
Volume 04 Issue 05
April 2018
17. Ataullah and Le (2006). A Study of Customer Satisfaction Public and Private Sector
Banks of India. Punjab Journal of Business Studies, 3 (2): 121-127.
18. Das et al., (2006). Stochastic Frontier Analysis of the Efficiency of Nigerian Banks. Indian
Journal of Economics and Business, 9 (1): 75-86
19. Raojibhai (2006). Apropos the Soundness of Public Sector Banks. Finance India, XVIII:
1651-1671
20. Khokhar, J. S.2011. Production Efficiency of Commercial Banks in India. Business
Analyst, 20 (4) : 8-14.
21. Kohli, H., & Chawala, A. 2016. Profitability Trends in Commercial Banks-A Study of
Selected Commercial Banks. Indian Management Studies Journal, 11: 51-70.

REVIEW ON THE PRODUCTIVE EFFICIENCY OF BANKS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to REVIEW ON THE PRODUCTIVE EFFICIENCY OF BANKS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY.pdf

Similar to REVIEW ON THE PRODUCTIVE EFFICIENCY OF BANKS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY.pdf (20)

More from DR BHADRAPPA HARALAYYA

More from DR BHADRAPPA HARALAYYA (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

REVIEW ON THE PRODUCTIVE EFFICIENCY OF BANKS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY.pdf