Regulatory regime change in Turkish banks:Reactive or proactive?

This paper examines the positive contributions made toward restructuring the regulatory framework of Turkey's banking and financial sectors prior to and post the 2000–2001 financial crisis. Drawing on a framework initially developed by Onis and Senses, 2007 and Onis and Senses, 2009 and further referred to by Onis, 2009 and Onis, 2010 it argues that financial reforms undertaken by the Turkish government would not have been successful without the strong support of domestic coalitions. While the external pressures put on the Turkish government from the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank and the European Union for financial reforms were necessary to kick start the reforms as a reactive process, these pressures on their own may have served only the interests of financial business elites at the expense of the broader stakeholders. Empirical data for the study was collected from documentary analysis of key financial institutions and interviews with twenty major Turkish regulatory agents and other stakeholders. The paper then discusses how the perceptions of these stakeholders are embodied into, and have influenced, regulatory regime change in Turkey from a reactive state to a more proactive one.

The Size Distribution of US Banks and Credit Unions

This study examines the firm size distribution of US banks and credit unions. A truncated lognormal distribution describes the size distribution, measured using assets data, of a large population of small, community-based commercial banks. The size distribution of a smaller but increasingly dominant cohort of large banks, which operate a high-volume low-cost retail banking model, exhibits power-law behaviour. There is a progressive increase in skewness over time, and Zipf’s Law is rejected as a descriptor of the size distribution in the upper tail. By contrast, the asset size distribution of the population of credit unions conforms closely to the lognormal distribution.

Facilitating a culture of responsible and effective sharing of cancer genome data

Rapid and affordable tumor molecular profiling has led to an explosion of clinical and genomic data poised to enhance the diagnosis, prognostication and treatment of cancer. A critical point has now been reached at which the analysis and storage of annotated clinical and genomic information in unconnected silos will stall the advancement of precision cancer care. Information systems must be harmonized to overcome the multiple technical and logistical barriers to data sharing. Against this backdrop, the Global Alliance for Genomic Health (GA4GH) was established in 2013 to create a common framework that enables responsible, voluntary and secure sharing of clinical and genomic data. This Perspective from the GA4GH Clinical Working Group Cancer Task Team highlights the data-aggregation challenges faced by the field, suggests potential collaborative solutions and describes how GA4GH can catalyze a harmonized data-sharing culture.