sources total factor productivity growth malaysian islamic bank

8/13/2019 Sources total factor productivity growth malaysian islamic bank

1/20

This article was downloaded by: [University of Malaya]On: 31 August 2012, At: 10:35Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Service Industries JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors and

subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fsij20

Sources of TFP growth in the Malaysian

Islamic banking sectorFadzlan Sufian

a

aKhazanah Research and Investment Strategy, Khazanah Nasional

Berhad, Level 35, Tower 2, Petronas Twin Towers Kuala LumpurCity Centre, 50088, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Version of record first published: 04 Feb 2010

To cite this article:Fadzlan Sufian (2009): Sources of TFP growth in the Malaysian Islamic banking

sector, The Service Industries Journal, 29:9, 1273-1291

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02642060801911128

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02642060801911128http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fsij20


2/20

Sources of TFP growth in the Malaysian Islamic banking sector

Fadzlan Sufian

Khazanah Research and Investment Strategy, Khazanah Nasional Berhad, Level 35, Tower 2,Petronas Twin Towers Kuala Lumpur City Centre, 50088 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

(Received 8 January 2008; final version received 11 January 2008)

This paper attempts to empirically analyse productivity changes of the MalaysianIslamic banking sector during the period of 2001 2004 by applying the non-parametric Malmquist productivity index method. During the period of study, theempirical findings suggest that the Malaysian Islamic banking sector has exhibitedproductivity progress during the earlier years before declining during the latter

years. The results suggest that foreign banks have exhibited higher productivitylevels compared with their domestic counterparts during the earlier years, while thedomestic banks productivity levels were relatively higher compared with theforeign banks during the latter years.

Keywords: Islamic bank productivity; Malmquist total factor productivity index(MPI); Malaysia

Introduction

In recent years, financial institutions have experienced a dynamic, fast-paced, and

competitive environment at a cross-border scale. One of the most productive areas isthe new paradigm of Islamic banking, which has remarkably captured the interest of

both Islamic and contemporary economists. A recent survey states that there are more

than 160 Islamic financial institutions around the world (Dar, 2003). Even though most

of the Islamic banks are within developing or Middle-East countries, many conventional

banks in developed countries have begun to valve the massive demand for Islamic finan-

cial products.

The main difference between the Islamic banks and the contemporary banks is that

while the latter is based on the conventional interest-based principle, the former follows

a principle of interest-free and profit and loss sharing (PLS) in performing their business

as intermediaries (Ariff, 1988). Many Islamic economic studies have discussed in depth

about the rationale behind the prohibition of interest (Chapra, 2000) and the importance

of PLS in Islamic banking (Dar & Presley, 2000). Furthermore, under the term of

Islamic PLS, the relationship between borrower, lender, and intermediary is rooted on

financial trust and partnership. The importance of the interest-free principle in Islamic

banking has created an innovative environment among practitioners in which the

alternative of interest is explored extensively. Dar (2003) classifies four types of finan-

cing that act as alternatives to interest: investment-based, sale-based, rent-based, and

service-based.

The existing research in Islamic banking and finance has focused primarily on the

conceptual issues underlying interest-free financing (Ahmed, 1981; Karsen, 1982).

ISSN 0264-2069 print/ISSN 1743-9507 online

# 2009 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/02642060801911128

http://www.informaworld.com

Email: [email protected]

The Service Industries Journal

Vol. 29, No. 9, September 2009, 12731291


3/20

These issues include the viability of Islamic banks and their ability to mobilise saving,

pool risks, and facilitate transactions. On the other hand, few studies have focused on

the policy implications of a financial system without interest payments (Khan & Mirakhor,

1987). What is noteworthy is that empirical work on the performance evaluation of Islamic

banks is sparse. The lack of complete data impeded any comprehensive analysis of the

experience of the last three decades. To date, empirical works done in this area of research

have yielded inconclusive results (Bashir, 1999; Bashir, Darrat, & Suliman, 1993).

The Malaysian banking system has a unique setting, where conventional banks are

allowed to offer Islamic banking and finance products along with the conventional

products. This dual banking system provides an interesting ground to investigate the effi-

ciency of domestic and foreign banks. As Malaysia is among the first countries in the

world that implement a dual banking system, this study would be among the first empirical

investigation to examine the productivity of domestic versus foreign banks that provide

Islamic banking services alongside the traditional conventional banking services.

By applying the non-parametric Malmquist productivity index (MPI) methodology, we

attempt to investigate the sources of productivity change of Malaysian Islamic banksduring the period of 20012004. The preferred methodology has allowed us to isolate

efforts to catch up to the frontier (efficiency change) from shifts in the frontier (techno-

logical change (TECHCH)). Also, the Malmquist index enables us to explore the main

sources of efficiency change: either improvements in management practices (pure

technical efficiency change) or improvements towards optimal size (scale efficiency

change). Finally, we performed a series of parametric and non-parametric tests to

examine whether the domestic and foreign banks were drawn from the same population.

The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. The second section provides some

background on the Islamic banking system in Malaysia, while the third section reviews the

related studies with respect to the Islamic banking industry. The fourth section describesthe data, sources, and model specification, which are employed in the study, and the

empirical results are presented in the following section. The conclusion is given in the

final section.

Background

In Malaysia, Islamic financing traces its root back to 1963, with the establishment of the

Pilgrims Fund Board or Lembaga Tabung Haji (LTH). The LTH introduced a savings

mechanism that enables Malaysian Muslims to save money to cover their costs of perform-

ing the annual pilgrimage. Money from the savings are invested in productive sectors of

the economy, which yield returns uncontaminated by riba.1

Malaysia, as a country dominated by Muslims, was affected by the resurgence that had

taken place in the Middle East. Many parties were calling for the establishment of an

Islamic bank in Malaysia. For example, in 1980, the Bumiputera Economic Congress

had proposed to the Malaysian Government to allow the setting up of an Islamic bank

in the country. Another effort was the setting up of the National Steering Committee in

1981 to undertake a study and make recommendations to the Government on all

aspects of the setting up of an Islamic bank in Malaysia, such as the legal, religious,

and operational aspects. The study concluded that the establishment of an Islamic bank

in Malaysia would be a viable project from the operations and profits point of views.

The conclusion was the establishment of the first Islamic bank in Malaysia known as

Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad (BIMB) in July 1983, with an initial paid-up capital of

RM80 million.

1274 F. Sufian


4/20

The establishment of BIMB marked a new milestone for the development of the

Islamic financial system in Malaysia. BIMB carries out banking business similar to

other commercial banks, but along the principles ofSyariah. The bank offers deposit-

taking products such as current and savings deposit under the concept of Al-Wadiah

Yad Dhamanah (guaranteed custody) and investment deposits under the concept of

Al-Mudharabah (profit-sharing). The bank grants financing facilities such as working

capital financing under Al-Murabahah (cost-plus), house financing under Bai Bithaman

Ajil (deferred payment sale), leasing under Al-Ijarah (leasing), and project financing

underAl-Musyarakah (PLS).

It has been the aspiration of the government to create a vibrant and comprehensive

Islamic banking and finance system operating side-by-side with the conventional

system. A single Islamic bank does not fit the definition of a system. An Islamic

banking and finance system requires a large number of dynamic and pro-active players,

a wide range of products and innovative instruments, and a vibrant Islamic money

market. The first step in realising the vision was to disseminate Islamic banking on a

nationwide basis with as many players as possible and within the shortest period possible.This was achieved through the introduction of an Islamic Banking Scheme (IBS) or Skim

Perbankan Islam(SPI) in March 1993. The SPI allows conventional banking institutions

to offer Islamic banking products and services using their existing infrastructure, including

staff and branches. The scheme was launched on 4 March 1993 on a pilot basis involving

three banks. Following the successful implementation of the pilot run, Bank Negara

Malaysia (BNM) has allowed other commercial banks, finance companies, and merchant

banks to operate the scheme in July 1993 subject to the specific guidelines issued by the

central bank. From only three banks offering Islamic financing in March 1993, the number

of commercial banks that offered Islamic financing has increased to 15 (of which four are

foreign banks).The Islamic banking system, which forms the backbone of the Islamic financial

system, plays an important role in mobilising deposits and providing financing to facilitate

economic growth. The Malaysian Islamic banking system is currently represented by 15

banking institutions comprising nine domestic commercial banks, four foreign commer-

cial banks, and two Islamic banks that offer Islamic banking products and services

under the IBS. These Islamic banking institutions offer a broad range of Islamic financial

products and services such as savings, current and investment deposits, and financing pro-

ducts such as property financing, working capital financing, project financing, plant and

machinery financing, etc.

The ability of the Islamic banking institutions to arrange and offer products with attrac-

tive and innovative features at prices that are competitive with conventional products has

appealed to both Muslim and non-Muslim customers. This reflects that the Islamic banking

system, with its extensive distribution networks (numbering 152 full-fledged Islamic

banking branches and over 2000 Islamic banking counters), is effective as a financial inter-

mediator. Islamic banking has also spurred the efforts by other non-bank financial inter-

mediaries such as the development financial institutions, savings institutions, and

housing credit institutions to introduce Islamic schemes and instruments to meet their

customer demands.

Today, Malaysia has succeeded in implementing a dual banking system and has

emerged as among the first few nations to have a full-fledged Islamic banking system

operating side-by-side with the conventional banking system. Throughout the years,

Islamic banking has gained significance and has been on a progressive upward trend.

Since the year 2000, the Islamic banking industry has been growing at an average

The Service Industries Journal 1275


5/20

rate of 19% per annum in terms of assets. As at end-2004, total assets of the Islamic

banking sector increased to RM94.6 billion, which accounted for 10.5% of the total

assets in the banking system. The market share of Islamic deposits and financing

increased to 11.2% and 11.3% of the total banking sector deposits and financing,

respectively. The rapid progress of the domestic Islamic banking system, accentuated

by the significant expansion and development of Islamic banking and finance, has

become increasingly more important in meeting the changing requirements of the new

economy (BNM, 2004).

Related studies

Although there has been extensive literature examining the efficiency features of US

and European banking markets over recent years, the work on Islamic banking is

still in its infancy. Typically, studies on Islamic bank efficiency have focused on theor-

etical issues and the empirical work has relied mainly on the analysis of descriptive

statistics rather than rigorous statistical estimation (El-Gamal & Inanoglu, 2005).However, this is gradually changing as a number of recent studies have sought to

apply the approaches outlined above to estimate bank efficiency using various frontier

techniques.

Hussein (2003) provides an analysis of the cost-efficiency features of Islamic banks in

Sudan between 1990 and 2000. Using the stochastic cost frontier approach, he estimates

the cost efficiency for a sample of 17 banks over the period. The interesting contribution

of this paper is that specific definitions of Islamic financial products are used as outputs. In

addition, the analysis is also novel as Sudan has a banking system based entirely on Islamic

banking principles. The results show large variations in the cost efficiency of Sudanese

banks with the foreign-owned banks being the most efficient. State-owned banks are themost cost inefficient. The analysis is extended to examine the determinants of bank effi-

ciency. Here, he finds that smaller banks are more efficient than their larger counterparts.

In addition, banks that have higher proportion ofmusharakah and mudharabah finance

relative to total assets also have efficiency advantages. Overall, the substantial variability

in efficiency estimates is put down to various factors, not least the highly volatile

economic environment under which Sudanese banks have had to operate over the last

decade or so.

Hassan and Hussein (2003) examined the efficiency of the Sudanese banking system

during the period of 1992 and 2000. They applied a variety of parametric (cost and

profit efficiencies) and non-parametric DEA techniques to a panel of 17 Sudanese

banks. They found that the average cost and profit efficiencies under the parametric

approach were 55% and 50%, respectively, while it was 23% under the non-parametric

approach. During the period of study, they found that the Sudanese banking system

have exhibited 37% allocative efficiency and 60% technical efficiency, suggesting that

the overall cost inefficiency of the Sudanese Islamic banks were mainly due to technical

(managerially related) rather than allocative (regulatory).

El-Gamal and Inanoglu (2005) used the stochastic frontier approach to estimate the

cost efficiency of Turkish banks over the period 19902000. The study compared the

cost efficiencies of 49 conventional banks with four Islamic special finance houses

(SFHs). The Islamic firms comprised around 3% of the Turkish banking market.

Overall, they found that the Islamic financial institutions to be the most efficient and

this was explained by their emphasis on Islamic asset-based financing, which led to

lower non-performing loans ratios. It is worth mentioning that SFHs achieved high

1276 F. Sufian


6/20

levels of efficiency despite being subjected to branching and other self-imposed con-

straints such as the inability to hold government bonds.

Despite the considerable development of the Islamic banking sector, studies focusing

on the efficiency of Islamic banks, particularly on the Malaysian Islamic banking industry

are still very limited. Several studies that have been devoted to assess the performance of

Islamic banks have generally examined the relationship between profitability and banking

characteristics. Samad and Hassan (1999) applied financial ratio analysis to investigate the

performance of a Malaysian Islamic bank over the period 1984 1997. Their results

suggest that, in general, the managements lack of knowledge was the main reason for

the slow growth of loans under the profit-sharing system. Despite that, the bank was

found to perform better compared with its conventional counterparts in terms of liquidity

and risk measurement (lower risks).

Methodology

Three different indices are frequently used to evaluate TECHCHs: the Fisher (1922),

Tornqvist (1936), and Malmquist (1953) indexes. According to Grifell-Tatje and Lovell

(1996), the Malmquist index has three main advantages relative to the Fischer and Tornq-

vist indices.2 First, it does not require the profit maximisation, or the cost minimisation,

assumption. Secondly, it does not require information on the input and output prices.

Finally, if the researcher has panel data, it allows the decomposition of productivity

changes into two components (technical efficiency change or catching up and technical

change or changes in the best practice). Its main disadvantage is the necessity to

compute the distance functions. However, the data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique

can be used to solve this problem.

Following Fare, Grosskopf, Norris, and Zhang (1994) among others, the output-orientedMalmquist productivity change index will be adopted for this study. Output orientationrefers

to the emphasis on the equi-proportionate increase of outputs, within the context of a given

level of input. The output-based Malmquist productivity change index may be formulated as:

Mt1j yt1;xt1;yt;xt

Dtj yt1;xt1

Dtj y

t;xt

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dt1j y

t;xt

" #1=2(1)

whereMis the productivity of the most recent production point (xt 1, yt 1) relative to

the earlier production point (xt, yt) and Ds the output distance functions. Thus, a valuegreater than unity will indicate a positive factor productivity growth between two periods.

Following Fare et al. (1994), an equivalent way of writing this index is:

Mt1j yt1;xt1;yt;xt

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dtjyt;xt

Dtjy

t1;xt1

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dtjy

t;xt

Dt1j yt;xt

" #1=2(2)

In Equation (2), the ratio outside the brackets is equal to the change of technical effi-

ciency between time tand t 1. In other words, it represents the change in the relative

distance of the observed production from the maximum potential production. The com-

ponent inside the brackets of Equation (2) is the geometric mean of the two productivity

indexes and represents the shift in production technologies (technical change) between

time tand t 1.



7/20

That is,

Technical efficiency (TE)Dt1j y

t1;xt1

Dtj yt;xt

(3)

Technological change (TECHCH) Dtjy

t1;xt1

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dtjy

t;xt

Dt1j yt;xt

" #1=2(4)

Technical efficiency change (TE) in Equation (3) can be further decomposed as the

product of two components PTE change and scale efficiency change as follows

(Fare et al., 1994):

Dt1yt1;xt1

Dtyt;xt

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dtjyt;xt

Dt1j yt1;xt1

Dtjyt;xt

Dtjyt;xt

Dt1j yt1;xt1" # (5)

The ratio outside the brackets in Equation (5) represents the pure technical efficiency

change, subject to a distance function (Dj) with variable returns to scale, between time t

and t 1 and is denoted by PECH hereafter. In other words,

Pure technical efficiency change (PEFFCH) Dt1 yt1;xt1

Dt yt;xt

(6)

The component inside the brackets of Equation (6) represents the effects of economies

of scale on productivity and is expressed as SECH which can be readily derived by divid-

ing TE of Equation (3) by PEFFCH of Equation (6) and would not involve its own com-

putations of additional distance functions. That is, scale efficiency change (SECH)

Scale efficiency change (SECH) TE

PEFFCH (7)

After incorporating Equations (5) (7) into Equation (2), we obtain the complete

decomposition of the MPI as follows:

MPI TE TECHCH

TECHCH PEFFCH SECH (8)

Another merit of defining the MPI using the output distance functions Dtis that the

MPI and its corresponding components (TE, TECHCH, PEFFCH, and SECH) are all cal-

culated in an index form and have a threshold value of one. In other words, if a derived

value is equal to one, it indicates that a banks performance remains unchanged in that

performance measure. A value of greater than one represents an improvement and a

value of less than one indicate a decline. The product of the index components of

TECHCH, PEFFCH, and SECH then amounts to the final MPI.

To determine the final MPI, a close examination of Equations (2) and (5) reveal

that we have to compute TECHCH, TE, and PEFFCH and then derive SECH by dividing

1278 F. Sufian


8/20

TE by PEFFCH. Each output distance function corresponds to one particular output-oriented

DEA linear programme. Among TECHCH, TE, and PEFFCH, there are six output distance

functions, and thus, a total of six different DEA models have to be formulated and solved:

Dt1

yt1

;xt1

;Dt1

yt

;xt ;D

t

yt

;xt ;D

t

yt1

;xt1

;Dt1

j yt1

;xt1

;Dt

j yt

;xt

(9)

To illustrate, assume that there are N financial institutions and that each varying

amounts ofKdifferent inputs to produce Mdifferent outputs. Thejth financial institutions

is therefore represented by the vectorsxjyjand the K Ninput matrixXand the M N

output matrixYrepresent the data of all financial institutions in the sample. In other words,

xjis the input combinations for bankj, whereasyjis the output combinations for bankj.3

The purpose is to construct a non-parametric envelopment frontier over the data points

such that all observed points lie on or below the production frontier. The calculations

exploit the fact that the input distance functions, D, used to construct the Malmquist

index are the reciprocals of Farrell (1957) output orientation technical efficiency measures.The convexity constraintNil = 1 is introduced in Equations (10) (13) to assume variable

returns to scale. By solving the equations with the same data under constant returns to scale

and variable returns to scale, measures of overall technical efficiency, TE, and pure tech-

nical efficiency, PTE, are obtained. Hence, dividing the overall technical efficiency, TE,

by pure technical efficiency, PTE, yields a measure of scale efficiency, SE

Dtjyt;xt1 maxu;l u

s.t.yjt Ytl 0

uxjt Xtl 0l 0

10

Dt1j yt1;xt11 maxu;l u

s.t.yjt1 Yt1l 0

uxjt1 Xt1l 0

l 0

11

Dt1j yt;xt1 maxu;l u

s.t.yjt Yt1l 0

uxjt Xt1l 0

l 0

12

Dtjyt1;xt11 maxu;l u

s.t.yjt1 Ytl 0

uxjt1 Xtl 0

l 0

13



9/20

Data sample, inputs outputs definition, and the choice of variables

For the empirical analysis, all Malaysian conventional banks that offered Islamic banking

window services were incorporated in the study. The annual balance sheets and income

statements used to construct the variables for the empirical analysis were taken from pub-

lished balance sheet information in annual reports of each individual bank.

The definition and measurement of inputs and outputs in the banking function remains

a contentious issue among researchers. To determine what constitutes inputs and outputs

of banks, one should first decide on the nature of banking technology. In the banking

theory literature, there are two main approaches competing with each other in this

regard: the production and intermediation approaches (Sealey & Lindley, 1977).

Under the production approach, a financial institution is defined as a producer of ser-

vices for account holders; that is, they perform transactions on deposit accounts and

process documents such as loans. Hence, according to this approach, the number of

accounts or its related transactions is the best measure for output, while the number of

employees and physical capital is considered as inputs. Previous studies that adopted

this approach are by Sherman and Gold (1985), Ferrier and Lovell (1990), and Fried,

Lovell, and Eeckaut (1993) among others.

The intermediation approach on the other hand assumes that financial firms act as an inter-

mediary between savers and borrowers and posits total loans and securities as outputs,

whereas deposits along with labour and physical capital are defined as inputs. Previous

banking efficiency studies that adopted this approach are, among others, Charnes, Cooper,

Huang, and Sun (1990), Bhattacharya, Lovell, and Sahay (1997), and Sathye (2001).

For the purpose of this study, a variation of the intermediation approach or asset

approach originally developed by Sealey and Lindley (1977) will be adopted in the defi-

nition of inputs and outputs used.4 According to Berger and Humphrey (1997), the pro-

duction approach may be more suitable for branch efficiency studies, as at most timesbank branches basically process customer documents and bank funding, while investment

decisions are mostly not under the control of branches.

The aim in the choice of variables for this study is to provide a parsimonious model and

to avoid the use of unnecessary variables that may reduce the degree of freedom. All vari-

ables are measured in millions of Ringgit (RM). We model Malaysian Islamic banks as

multi-product firms producing two outputs by employing three inputs. Accordingly, we

assume Malaysian Islamic banks produce total loans (y1) and income (y2) by employing

total deposits (x1), labour (x2), and fixed assets (x3). Data for the empirical analysis are

sourced from individual banks IBS annual balance sheet and income statements.5

Table 1 presents the summary of statistics for the outputs and inputs for MalaysianIslamic banking operations. A few conclusions can be drawn. First, over the 4-year

period, total assets of Malaysian Islamic banking operations grew by about 71% to

RM4.82 trillion in 2004 from RM2.82 trillion in 2001. Secondly, it is apparent that

there has been increasing awareness among the Malaysian public about Islamic banking

and finance during this period, substantiated by the growth in total loans (financing) to

the domestic economy and deposits from the Malaysian public in the same period.

During the years (20012004), total loans and deposits grew by about 115% and by

about 79%, respectively. Thirdly, conclusion could also be made about employment in

the Islamic banking industry during this period. It is clear from Table 1 that the Malaysian

Islamic banking and finance industry has created significant employment for the period.

As data on the number of employees are not readily made available, we use personnel

expenses as a proxy measure. From Table 1 it is apparent that personnel expenses have

1280 F. Sufian


10/20

expanded by 108% during the 4-year period. Finally, the Islamic banking and finance

industry has increasingly generated awesome returns to Malaysian Islamic banks.

During the period of study, we have witnessed more than 122% increase in the mean

income of Malaysian Islamic banks, from a mere RM87, 122.43 billion in 2001 to

RM193,769.33 billion in 2004.

Results

In this section, we will discuss the productivity change of the Malaysian Islamic banking

industry, measured by the MPI, and assign the changes in total factor productivity change

(TFPCH) to technological change (TECHCH) and efficiency change (EFFCH). We also

attempt to attribute any change in EFFCH to changes in pure technical efficiency

(PEFFCH) and/or scale efficiency (SECH). The summary of annual means of TFPCH,

TECHCH, EFFCH, and its decomposition into PEFFCH and SECH for the years

20012004 is presented in Table 2. Because 2001 is the reference year, the Malmquist

TFPCH index and its components take an initial score of 1.000 for 2001. Hence, any

score greater (lower) than 1.000 in subsequent years indicates an improvement

(worsening) in the relevant measures. Annual values of the indices for the industry and

each Malaysian Islamic banks sub-group are provided in Tables 25.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for inputs and outputs.

2001 (RMb) 2002 (RMb) 2003 (RMb) 2004 (RMb)

OutputsTotal loans (y1)

Minimum 26,377 20,796 17,096 12,023Mean 1,441,734.71 1,873,301 2,499,915.20 3,094,485.80Maximum 6,409,411 8,253,532 11,703,438 14,581,517Standard deviation 1,937,174.37 2,442,768.01 3,263,292.70 3,868,114.68

Income (y2)Minimum 3407 3961 5917 10,802Mean 87,122.43 107,506.93 159,752.20 193,769.33Maximum 431,401 490,847 571,711 611,655Standard deviation 127,206.77 153,407.31 166,571.12 193,355.08

InputsTotal deposits (x1)

Minimum 79,679 62,266 97,797 627,564Mean 2,384,403.93 3,117,977.21 3,726,400.40 4,269,593.13Maximum 9,064,966 12,166,584 12,577,435 15,965,833Standard deviation 3,019,347.63 3,833,396.16 4,094,701.14 4,510,658.40

Labour (x2)Minimum 389 743 895 653Mean 7737.71 8703.93 14,726.2 16,115.47Maximum 72,398 75,172 88,137 93,865Standard deviation 18,798.22 19,579.20 26,396.60 27,972.43

Assets (x3)Minimum 140,156 93,056 150,511 834,447

Mean 2,817,694.50 3,512,071.79 4,381,516.13 4,821,954.73Maximum 10,358,576 13,204,458 15,578,265 15,578,265Standard deviation 3,415,938.21 4,222,744.81 4,757,408.56 4,570,657.78



11/20

Table 2. TFPCH of Malaysian Islamic banking sector all banks.

EFFCH TECHCH PEFFCH SECH TFPCH

Panel A (2001 2002)Affin Bank Berhad 0.978 1.348 1.000 0.978 1.319

Alliance Bank Berhad 0.677 1.227 0.717 0.944 0.831Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.600 1.219 0.689 0.871 0.732EON Bank Berhad 0.893 1.151 0.922 0.968 1.027Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.067 1.438 1.051 1.015 1.535Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.122 1.000 1.000 1.122Public Bank Berhad 0.842 1.286 1.000 0.842 1.082RHB Bank Berhad 0.886 1.018 0.929 0.953 0.901Southern Bank Berhad 1.222 1.129 1.290 0.947 1.380Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 1.443 1.296 1.000 1.443 1.870Hong Kong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.040 1.000 1.000 1.040OCBC Bank Berhad 0.623 1.136 0.586 1.062 0.708Citibank Berhad 1.000 1.211 1.000 1.000 1.211

Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 0.750 1.301 1.000 0.750 0.976Geometric mean 0.901 1.203 0.925 0.974 1.084Maximum 1.443 1.438 1.290 1.443 1.870Minimum 0.600 1.018 0.586 0.750 0.708Standard deviation 0.231 0.118 0.175 0.155 0.321

Panel B (2002 2003)Affin Bank Berhad 1.022 1.138 1.000 1.022 1.164Alliance Bank Berhad 0.831 1.341 0.819 1.015 1.114Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 1.448 0.947 1.267 1.142 1.371EON Bank Berhad 1.228 1.096 1.084 1.133 1.346Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.236 1.000 1.000 1.236

Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.229 1.000 1.000 1.229Public Bank Berhad 1.156 0.962 1.000 1.156 1.111RHB Bank Berhad 0.996 1.216 1.141 0.873 1.211Southern Bank Berhad 1.080 0.941 0.919 1.175 1.017Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 0.741 0.939 0.576 1.285 0.695Hong Kong Bank Berhad 0.946 0.992 0.970 0.975 0.938OCBC Bank Berhad 0.973 1.330 1.356 0.717 1.293Citibank Berhad 1.000 1.029 1.000 1.000 1.029Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 1.106 0.926 1.000 1.106 1.025

Geometric mean 1.025 1.085 0.992 1.033 1.112Maximum 1.448 1.341 1.356 1.285 1.371Minimum 0.741 0.926 0.576 0.717 0.695Standard deviation 0.170 0.152 0.185 0.141 0.180

Panel C (2003 2004)Affin Bank Berhad 0.911 0.793 0.989 0.921 0.722Alliance Bank Berhad 2.537 0.994 3.910 0.649 2.521Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.926 0.947 1.199 0.772 0.877EON Bank Berhad 1.000 0.984 1.000 1.000 0.984Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 0.858 1.000 1.000 0.858Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.111 1.000 1.000 1.111Public Bank Berhad 0.963 0.878 1.000 0.963 0.845RHB Bank Berhad 1.451 0.974 1.178 1.232 1.413Southern Bank Berhad 1.015 0.915 1.249 0.813 0.928Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 0.512 0.913 1.735 0.295 0.468

(Continued)

1282 F. Sufian


12/20

Total factor productivity growth of Malaysian Islamic banks

As depicted in Panels AC of Table 2, the Malmquist results suggest that during theperiod of 2001 2004, Malaysian Islamic banks have exhibited TFPCH progress in

years 2002 and 2003 before declining in year 2004. With respect to year 2001, the

average TFPCH increase was 8.4% in year 2002, increasing to 11.2% in year 2003

before exhibiting 4.6% TFPCH regress in year 2004. During the years 2002 and 2003,

TFPCH progress of the Malaysian Islamic banks was mainly due to TECHCH, which

increased by 20.3% and 8.5%, respectively. On the other hand, the decline in the Malay-

sian Islamic banks TFPCH during the year 2004 was mainly due to the decline in

TECHCH of 6.7% during that year. The empirical evidence seems to suggest that the

Malaysian Islamic banks have exhibited 9.9% EFFCH decrease in 2002 before increasing

by 2.5% in 2003. From Table 2 it is apparent that the Malaysian Islamic banks TECHCHdeclined by 6.7% in 2004; however, they have continued to record positive EFFCH of

2.3% during the year, albeit lower compared with the level recorded in 2003. The

decomposition of the EFFCH index into its PEFFCH and SECH components suggest

that the dominant source of the decrease in Malaysian Islamic banks EFFCH during

the year 2002 was managerially related rather than scale-related, implying that the Malay-

sian Islamic banks were less efficient in controlling their costs during the years, rather than

operating at the wrong scale of operations. Similarly, the results suggest that SECH has

largely led to the increase in Malaysian Islamic banks efficiency during the year 2003.

During the year, the SECH of Malaysian Islamic banks increased by 3.3% while the

PEFFCH declined by 0.8%. In contrast, during the year 2004 the results suggest that

Malaysian Islamic banks have exhibited 22.0% decline in the SECH, which was offset

by the 26.6% increase in PEFFCH during the year.

Panels AC of Table 3 present the results for the Malaysian domestic Islamic banks

(DOM_BNKS). As observed, the DOM_BNKS have exhibited TFPCH progress during

all years, 7.5% in 2002 relative to 2001, increasing strongly to exhibit 18.5% TFPCH pro-

gress in 2003 relative to 2002 before declining markedly to record 6.6% increase in

TFPCH in 2004 relative to 2003. The decomposition of the TFPCH index into its

TECHCH and EFFCH components suggest that the decline in the DOM_BNKS TFPCH

in 2004 was largely a result of the decline in TECHCH of 6.3% during the year. In contrast,

the strong increase in the DOM_BNKS TFPCH in 2003 was also a result of the strong

increase in TECHCH, which increased by 24.7%. The results thus suggest that like theTFPCH index, the DOM_BNKS TECHCH index also follow an inverted U-shaped beha-

viour during the period of our study. The decomposition of the EFFCH index into its

Table 2. Continued.


Hong Kong Bank Berhad 1.026 0.967 1.031 0.995 0.992OCBC Bank Berhad 2.065 1.016 2.039 1.013 2.098Citibank Berhad 0.329 0.856 1.000 0.329 0.282Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 1.266 0.896 1.000 1.266 1.134


Note: EFFCH, efficiency change; TECHCH, technological change; PEFFCH, pure technical efficiency change;SECH, scale efficiency change; TFPCH, total factor productivity change.



13/20

Table 3. TFPCH of Malaysian Islamic banking sector domestic banks.


Panel A (2001 2002)Affin Bank Berhad 0.978 1.333 1.000 0.978 1.304

Alliance Bank Berhad 0.730 1.104 1.000 0.730 0.805Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.717 1.069 0.745 0.963 0.767EON Bank Berhad 0.936 1.089 0.955 0.980 1.019Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.064 1.416 1.000 1.064 1.506Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.110 1.000 1.000 1.110Public Bank Berhad 1.000 1.181 1.000 1.000 1.181RHB Bank Berhad 0.930 0.997 0.901 1.032 0.928Southern Bank Berhad 1.225 1.150 1.006 1.219 1.409Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 0.921 1.059 1.000 0.921 0.975

Geometric mean 0.939 1.145 0.957 0.982 1.075Maximum 1.225 1.416 1.006 1.219 1.506Minimum 0.717 0.997 0.745 0.730 0.767

Standard deviation 0.149 0.129 0.083 0.122 0.249

Panel B (2002 2003)Affin Bank Berhad 1.022 1.138 1.000 1.022 1.164Alliance Bank Berhad 0.725 1.521 1.000 0.725 1.103Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 1.223 1.138 1.340 0.913 1.392EON Bank Berhad 1.069 1.282 1.047 1.021 1.370Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.244 1.000 1.000 1.244Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.233 1.000 1.000 1.233Public Bank Berhad 1.000 1.165 1.000 1.000 1.165RHB Bank Berhad 0.916 1.320 1.120 0.818 1.209Southern Bank Berhad 0.854 1.177 1.000 0.854 1.006

Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 0.791 1.302 1.000 0.791 1.030


Panel C (2003 2004)Affin Bank Berhad 0.911 0.793 1.000 0.911 0.722Alliance Bank Berhad 2.537 0.995 1.000 2.537 2.525Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.916 0.957 1.001 0.914 0.877EON Bank Berhad 1.000 0.985 1.000 1.000 0.985

Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 0.858 1.000 1.000 0.858Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.111 1.000 1.000 1.111Public Bank Berhad 0.937 0.910 1.000 0.937 0.852RHB Bank Berhad 1.451 0.974 1.178 1.232 1.413Southern Bank Berhad 1.002 0.924 1.000 1.002 0.926Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad 1.266 0.896 1.000 1.266 1.134


Note: EFFCH, efficiency change; TECHCH, technological change; PEFFCH, pure technical efficiency change;

SECH, scale efficiency change; TFPCH, total factor productivity change.

1284 F. Sufian


14/20

PEFFCH and SECH components suggest that the dominant source of the decrease in the

DOM_BNKS EFFCH in 2002 was purely technically related, whereas on the other handthe decline in the DOM_BNKS efficiency in 2003 was scale-related rather than manage-

rially related. Similarly, the results suggest that SECH has largely resulted in the increase

Table 4. TFPCH of Malaysian Islamic banking sector domestic banks (ex-full-fledgedIslamic banks.


Panel A (2001 2002)

Affin Bank Berhad 0.978 1.333 1.000 0.978 1.304Alliance Bank Berhad 0.730 1.104 1.000 0.730 0.805Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.717 1.069 0.745 0.963 0.767EON Bank Berhad 0.936 1.089 0.955 0.980 1.019Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.064 1.416 1.000 1.064 1.506Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.110 1.000 1.000 1.110Public Bank Berhad 1.000 1.189 1.000 1.000 1.189RHB Bank Berhad 0.930 0.997 0.901 1.032 0.928Southern Bank Berhad 1.223 1.151 1.006 1.216 1.407



Panel B (2002 2003)Affin Bank Berhad 1.022 1.138 1.000 1.022 1.164Alliance Bank Berhad 0.725 1.521 1.000 0.725 1.103Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 1.223 1.138 1.340 0.913 1.392EON Bank Berhad 1.069 1.282 1.047 1.021 1.370Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.244 1.000 1.000 1.244Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.233 1.000 1.000 1.233Public Bank Berhad 1.000 1.165 1.000 1.000 1.165RHB Bank Berhad 0.916 1.320 1.132 0.809 1.209Southern Bank Berhad 0.854 1.177 1.000 0.854 1.006


Panel C (2003 2004)Affin Bank Berhad 0.911 0.793 1.000 0.911 0.722Alliance Bank Berhad 2.537 0.995 1.000 2.537 2.525Arab-Malaysian Bank Berhad 0.916 0.957 1.001 0.914 0.877EON Bank Berhad 1.000 0.985 1.000 1.000 0.985Hong Leong Bank Berhad 1.000 0.858 1.000 1.000 0.858Maybank Berhad 1.000 1.111 1.000 1.000 1.111

Public Bank Berhad 0.937 0.910 1.000 0.937 0.852RHB Bank Berhad 1.451 0.974 1.165 1.246 1.413Southern Bank Berhad 1.002 0.924 1.000 1.002 0.926





15/20

in the DOM_BNKS EFFCH during the year 2004. In the same year, the DOM_BNKS

SECH increased by 12.0% and the PEFFCH increased by 1.7%.

To further check for the robustness of our results, we have also examined the results of

domestic Malaysian Islamic banks (DOM_BNKS) excluding the full-fledged Islamic banks

(DOM_X_BNKS). The results are presented in Panels A C of Table 4. Similar to

the results for the DOM_BNKS, during the period of study, the results suggest that

DOM_X_BNKS have exhibited TFPCH progress during all years albeit higher. The

results from Panels AC of Table 4 suggest that the DOM_X_BANKS have exhibited

8.8% TFPCH growth in 2002 relative to 2001, 20.4% progress in 2003 relative to 2002

and 5.9% growth in 2004 relative to 2003. Again, similar to the results for the domestic

Malaysian Islamic banks, the decomposition of the TFPCH index into its TECHCH and

EFFCH components suggest that the DOM_X_BNKS TFPCH growth during the years

2002 and 2003 was largely attributed to TECHCH, while EFFCH, which increased by

12.5%, has resulted in the TFPCH progress in 2004. It is apparent that the exclusion of

the full-fledged Malaysian Islamic banks has resulted in higher TECHCH during the

years 2002 and 2004. The results of the decomposition of the DOM_X_BNKS EFFCH

Table 5. TFPCH of Malaysian Islamic banking sector foreign banks.


Panel A (2001 2002)Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 1.443 1.296 1.000 1.443 1.870Hong Kong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.040 1.000 1.000 1.040OCBC Bank Berhad 0.905 1.168 1.000 0.905 1.057Citibank Berhad 1.000 1.211 1.000 1.000 1.211


Panel B (2002 2003)Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 0.823 0.887 0.695 1.184 0.730Hong Kong Bank Berhad 1.000 0.890 1.000 1.000 0.890OCBC Bank Berhad 1.105 1.418 1.000 1.105 1.567Citibank Berhad 1.000 1.011 1.000 1.000 1.011

Geometric mean 0.977 1.031 0.913 1.069 1.007

Maximum 1.105 1.418 1.000 1.184 1.567Minimum 0.823 0.887 0.695 1.000 0.730Standard deviation 0.117 0.251 0.153 0.089 0.364

Panel C (2003 2004)Standard Chartered Bank Berhad 0.578 0.994 1.438 0.402 0.574Hong Kong Bank Berhad 1.000 1.279 1.000 1.000 1.279OCBC Bank Berhad 1.000 1.696 1.000 1.000 1.696Citibank Berhad 0.470 1.041 1.000 0.470 0.489




1286 F. Sufian


16/20

into its PEFFCH and SECH components suggest that the exclusion of the full-fledged

Malaysian Islamic banks has resulted in higher SECH during the years 2002 and 2003.

On the other hand, PEFFCH seems to have declined in 2002, increased in 2003, and

remained the same in 2004.

The results for the foreign Islamic banks (FOR_BNKS) are presented in Panels AC

of Table 5. As observed, during the period of study the FOR_BNKS TFPCH was on a

declining trend, exhibiting TFPCH progress of 25.6% in 2002 before declining substan-

tially to exhibit TFPCH increase of only 0.7% in 2003 relative to 2002. It is also apparent

from Panel C of Table 5 that the FOR_BNKS have exhibited 11.6% TFPCH regress in

2004. The decomposition of the TFPCH index into its TECHCH and EFFCH components

suggest that the decline in the FOR_BNKS TFPCH in 2004 was largely attributed to the

decline in EFFCH of 27.8% during the year. Unlike the DOM_BNKS, the results suggest

that EFFCH has largely resulted in the increase in the FOR_BNKS TFPCH in 2002 and

2003. The FOR_BNKS TFPCH regress during the year 2004 was also the result of the

decline in EFFCH. The decomposition of the EFFCH index into its PEFFCH and

SECH components suggest that the dominant source of the decrease in the FOR_BNKSEFFCH in 2003 was managerially related, whereas on the other hand the decline in the

FOR_BNKS efficiency in 2004 was scale-related rather than managerially related. Simi-

larly, the results suggest that SECH has largely resulted in the increase in the FOR_BNKS

EFFCH during the year 2002. During the year 2002, the FOR_BNKS SECH increased by

6.9% while the PEFFCH was stagnant.

Univariate tests

After examining the Malmquist results, the issue of interest now is whether the two samples

were drawn from the same population and whether the domestic and foreign banks possessthe same technology. The null hypothesis tested was that the domestic banks and foreign

banks were drawn from the same population or environment. We tested the null hypothesis

that the domestic and foreign banks were drawn from the same population and have identical

technologies by using a series of parametric (ANOVA and t-test) and non-parametric

(KolmogorovSmirnov, Mann Whitney (Wilcoxon Rank-Sum), and Kruskall Wallis)

tests. Based on most of the results presented in Table 6, we failed to reject the null hypothesis

at the 0.05 levels of significance that the domestic banks and foreign banks were drawn from

the same population and have identical technologies. This implies that there is no significant

difference between the domestic and foreign banks technologies (frontiers) and that it is

appropriate to construct a combined frontier. Furthermore, the results from Levenes test

for equality of variances do not reject the null hypothesis that the variances among domestic

banks and foreign banks were equal, implying that we could assume the variances among

domestic and foreign banks to be equal. Our findings corroborate with those by, among

others, Sathye (2001) and Isik and Hassan (2002).

Conclusion and directions for future research

This paper attempts to investigate the productivity changes of Malaysian Islamic banks

during the period of 20012004, by applying a non-parametric MPI method. The preferred

methodology has allowed us to isolate efforts to catch up to the frontier (efficiency change)

from shifts in the frontier (technological change). Also, the Malmquist index enables us to

explore the main sources of efficiency change: either improvements in management practices

(PTE change) or improvements towards optimal size (scale efficiency change). Additionally,



17/20

Table 6. Summary of parametric and non-parametric tests for the null hypothesis that domestic banks (db) and foreign b(frontiers).

Test groups

Parametric test Non-parametric

Individual tests Analysis of variance(ANOVA) test

t-test KolmogorovSmirnov (K S)test

MannWhitneyRank-Sum

Hypotheses Meandb= meanfb Distributiondb= distributionfb Mediandb= mTest statistics F(p . F) T(p . t) K S (p . KS) z(p .

Productivity change(TFPCH)

0.101 (0.752) 0.318 (0.752) 0.342 (1.000) 20.168 (0

Technological change(TECHCH)

0.598 (0.282) 0.531 (0.598) 0.586 (0.883) 20.445 (0

Efficiency change(EFFCH)

0.820 (0.053) 0.229 (0.820) 0.488 (0.971) 20.088 (

Pure technical efficiencychange (PEFFCH)

0.533 (0.395) 0.628 (0.533) 0.537 (0.936) 20.084 (

Scale efficiency change(SECH)

0.590 (0.295) 0.543 (0.526) 0.683 (0.739) 20.571 (

Note: Test methodology follows among others, Aly, Grabowski, Pasurka, and Rangan (1990), Elyasiani and Mehdian (1992), and Isik antest) and non-parametric (KolmogorovSmirnov, MannWhitney, and KruskallWallis) tests test the null hypothesis that the domestic

efficiency population (environment).The numbers in parentheses are the p-values associated with the relative test.


18/20

we have also performed a series of parametric and non-parametric tests to examine whether

the domestic and foreign banks were drawn from the same set of population.

Our results suggest that Malaysian Islamic banks productivity have exhibited an

inverted U-shaped behaviour during the period of our study. The Malaysian Islamic

banks have exhibited 8.4% productivity progress in year 2002, increasing to record the

highest productivity change of 11.2% in 2003, before declining to record 4.6% pro-

ductivity regress in 2004. Our results suggest that the domestic banks have exhibited

higher productivity growth compared with their foreign counterparts. The decomposition

of the productivity change index suggests that Malaysian Islamic banks productivity pro-

gress was mainly attributable to technological change rather than efficiency change during

the years 2002 and 2003, whereas the opposite was true during the year 2004 when the

results suggest that Malaysian Islamic banks have exhibited higher efficiency change.

Further decomposition of the efficiency change index into its pure technical and scale effi-

ciency components suggests that during the period of study pure technical efficiency has

largely resulted in an increase in the Malaysian Islamic banks efficiency. However, the

results may have to be interpreted with caution as Malaysian Islamic banks were foundto have exhibited pure technical efficiency decline in 2000 and 2003 before increasing

strongly in 2004, which has eliminated the negative effects of 2002 and 2003.

Further, to address the issue whether the domestic and foreign banks were drawn from

the same sample of population or environment, or whether the domestic and foreign banks

have the same technological (frontiers) attribution, we have performed a series of para-

metric and non-parametric tests. Our results from the parametric and non-parametric

tests could not reject the null hypotheses at the 0.05 levels of significance that the domestic

and foreign banks were drawn from the same population or environment, suggesting that it

is appropriate to construct a single frontier for both the domestic and foreign banks.

The general conclusion that can be drawn from the findings is that, in recent years, thefull-fledged Islamic banks seems to have under-performed their window-based Islamic

banking peers, due to sub-optimal scale of operations. The principal findings for the

period under study indicate that technical efficiency scores are improving more for the

conventional banks offering Islamic banking products and services than for the full-

fledged Islamic banks. Thus, the results suggest that for the full-fledged Islamic bank to

be efficient, they need to reduce their size. The results are generally consistent with

earlier studies, which have found that the larger banks tend to be less efficient.

The emergence of two foreign banks, i.e. Citibank and Hong Kong Bank, as the global

leaders may be mainly explained by (1) advantages gained from their long-term involvement

in the Malaysian banking sector, (2) their ability to mobilise Islamic banking funds from the

Middle East (due to their wide international presence), and (3) their dynamism and innova-

tiveness in introducing and promoting new Islamic banking and finance products, to meet

domestic needs. Foreign banks are also considered to possess inherent economies of scale,

as a direct extension of their other international operations and so are capable of competing

with the incumbent domestic banks. From the policy-making perspective, the results may

imply that the opening up of the Islamic banking sector to the entry of foreign banks as an

important measure in the on-going process of efficiency improvement and innovation, as

well as increasing globalisation of the Malaysian financial system.

Due to its limitations, the paper could be extended in a variety of ways. Further analy-

sis into the investigation of Malaysian Islamic banks productivity is suggested to consider

the risk exposure factors. To establish overall Islamic banks performance, risk exposure

factors should be taken into consideration along with the productive efficiency measures.

The best banks may not necessarily be the most efficient producer of loans, but also ones



19/20

that balances high efficiency with low risk assumptions. Investigation of changes in the

efficiency changes over time by employing the DEA method could yet be another exten-

sion to the paper. Future research into the efficiency and productivity of Malaysian Islamic

banks could also consider the production function along with the intermediation function.

Despite these limitations, the findings of this study are expected to contribute signifi-

cantly to the existing knowledge on the operating performance of the Malaysian Islamic

banking industry. Nevertheless, the study has also provided further insight into the

banks specific management style as well as the policymakers in regard to attaining

optimal utilisation of capacities, improvement in managerial expertise, efficient allocation

of scarce resources, and most productive scale of operation of the banks in the industry. This

may facilitate directions for sustainable competitiveness of future Islamic banking oper-

ations in Malaysia.

Notes

1. Riba, the English translation of which isusury, is prohibited in Islam and is acknowledged by allMuslims. The prohibition ofriba is clearly mentioned in the Quran, the Islams holy book andthe traditions of Prophet Muhammad (sunnah). The Quran states: Believers! Do not consumeriba, doubling and redoubling. . . (3.130); God has made buying and selling lawful and ribaunlawful. . . (2:274).

2. The Malmquist total factor productivity index was not invented by Malmquist. In his paper(Malmquist, 1953), he brought input functions of distance into an analysis of consumption, devel-oping a method for the empirical measurement of standard of living. The change in livingstandards is defined as the ratio of two input functions of distance. Before the Malmquistpaper, the input function of distance was brought into a paper by Debreu (1951), and theoutput function of distance was introduced by Shephard in his book (Shephard, 1953). Thenatural development of their papers was the definition of the index of change of total factor

productivity as the ratio of two input or output functions of distance. Some 31 years had topass before it arrived. The Malmquist index of change in total factor productivity was proposedin a paper for the first time in Caves, Christensen, and Diewert (1982) Today, these indices areentitled partially oriented indices of change in total factor productivity. In the case of productiontechnology that satisfies the constant yields axiom, the indices are the same.

3. For easy understanding, the study denotes byj,y, andx to represents a particular bankj, outputsand inputs, respectively. In other words, it denotes the possible combinations of outputs andinputs for a particular bankj at time tand t 1.

4. Humphrey (1985) presents an extended discussion of the alternative approaches of what a bankproduces.

5. Only data from IBS accounts are used. Malaysian conventional banks offering Islamic bankingwindow services are required to maintain a separate IBS account. Hence, the data used are not

contaminated with the conventional banking operations.

References

Ahmed, K. (1981).Studies in Islamic economics. Leicester, UK: Islamic Foundation.Aly, H.Y., Grabowski, R., Pasurka, C., & Rangan, N. (1990). Technical, scale and allocative

efficiencies in US banking: An empirical investigation.Review of Economics and Statistics,72(2), 211218.

Ariff, M. (1988). Islamic banking. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, 2(2), 4864.Bank Negara Malaysia. (2004). Annual Report. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Bank Negara Malaysia.Bashir, A.H.M. (1999). Risk and profitability measures in Islamic banks: The case of two Sudanese

banks. Islamic Economic Studies,6(2), 124.

Bashir, A., Darrat, A., & Suliman, O. (1993). Equity capital, profit sharing contracts and investment:Theory and evidence.Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting,20(5), 639651.Berger, A.N., & Humphrey, D.B. (1997). Efficiency of financial institutions: International survey and

directions for future research.European Journal of Operational Research,98(2), 175212.

1290 F. Sufian


20/20

Bhattacharya, A., Lovell, C.A.K., & Sahay, P. (1997). The impact of liberalization on the productiveefficiency of Indian commercial banks. European Journal of Operational Research, 98(2),332345.

Caves, D.W., Christensen, L.R., & Diewert, W. (1982). The economic theory of index numbers andthe measurement of input, output and productivity. Econometrica, 50(6), 13931414.

Chapra, M.U. (2000). Why has Islam prohibited interest? Rationale behind the prohibition of inter-est.Review of Islamic Economics, 9, 520.

Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Huang, Z.M., & Sun, D.B. (1990). Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA modelswith an illustrative application to large commercial banks.Journal of Econometrics,46(12),7391.

Dar, H. (2003). Handbook of international banking. London: Edward Elgar.Dar, H.A., & Presley, J.R. (2000). Lack of profit loss sharing in Islamic banking: Management and

control imbalances. International Journal of Islamic Financial Services, 2(2), 105126.Debreu, G. (1951). The coefficient of resource utilisation. Econometrica, 19(3), 273292.El-Gamal, M.A., & Inanoglu, H. (2005). Efficiency and unobserved heterogeneity in Turkish

banking. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20(5), 641664.Elyasiani, E., & Mehdian, S.M. (1992). Productive efficiency performance of minority and non-min-

ority owned banks: A non-parametric approach. Journal of Banking and Finance, 16(5),

933948.Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., & Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress and

efficiency change in industrialized countries.The American Economic Review,84(1), 6683.Farrell, M.J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical

Society A,120(3), 253281.Ferrier, G., & Lovell, C.A.K. (1990). Measuring cost efficiency in banking: Econometric and linear

programming evidence. Journal of Econometrics, 46(1 2), 229245.Fisher, I. (1922). The making of index numbers. Boston, MA: Houghton-Muflin.Fried, H.O., Lovell, C.A.K., & Eeckaut, P.V. (1993). Evaluating the performance of US credit

unions. Journal of Banking and Finance, 17(2 3), 251265.Grifell-Tatje, E., & Lovell, C.A.K. (1996). Deregulation and productivity decline: The case of

Spanish savings banks. European Economic Review,40(6), 12811303.

Hassan, M.K., & Hussein, K.A. (2003). Static and dynamic efficiency in the Sudanese bankingsystem.Review of Islamic Economics, 14, 548.Humphrey, D.B. (1985). Cost and scale economies in bank intermediation. In R. Aspinwall & R.

Eisenbeis (Eds.),Handbook for banking strategy (pp. 745783). New York: John Wiley and Sons.Hussein, K.A. (2003). Operational efficiency in Islamic banking: The Sudanese experience,

(Working Paper No. 1). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute(IRTI), Islamic Development Bank.

Isik, I., & Hassan, M.K. (2002). Technical, scale and allocative efficiencies of Turkish bankingindustry.Journal of Banking and Finance, 26(4), 719766.

Karsen, I. (1982). Islam and financial intermediation. IMF Staff Papers,29(1), 108142.Khan, M., & Mirakhor, A. (1987). Theoretical studies in Islamic banking and finance. Houston, UK:

IRIS Books.Malmquist, S. (1953). Index numbers and indifference curves. Trabajos de Estadistica, 4(1), 209242.Samad, A., & Hassan, M.K. (1999). The performance of Malaysian Islamic bank during 19841997:

An exploratory study. International Journal of Islamic Financial Services,1(3), 127143.Sathye, M. (2001). X-efficiency in Australian banking: An empirical investigation. Journal of

Banking and Finance, 25(3), 613630.Sealey, C., & Lindley, J.T. (1977). Inputs, outputs and a theory of production and cost at depository

financial institutions.Journal of Finance, 32(4), 12511266.Shephard, R.W. (1953).Cost and production functions. New York: Princeton University Press.Sherman, H.D., & Gold, F. (1985). Bank branch operating efficiency: Evaluation with data envelop-

ment analysis.Journal of Banking and Finance,9(2), 297315.Tornqvist, L. (1936). The bank of Finlands consumption price index. Bank of Finland Monthly

Bulletin, 10, 18.


sources total factor productivity growth malaysian islamic bank

Documents