Despite much commentary in the media and the popular assumption that the banking industry exerts undue influence on government policy-making, the academic literature on the role of the banks since the 2008 financial crisis remains theoretically and empirically under-specified. In particular, we argue that different forms of financial power are often conflated, while favorable policy outcomes are too-readily assumed to be evidence of regulatory capture. In short, we still know relatively little about how bank influence varies over time and in different national contexts, the extent to which banking interests are unified or divided, and the conditions under which banks are capable of producing meaningful variation in policy outcomes. This article has three objectives: 1) to explain why the debate on bank influence matters; 2) to examine the evidence of bank influence since the international financial crisis; and 3) to set out a range of conceptual tools for thinking about bank power.

中文翻译：

---

金融危机以来的银行权力和公共政策

尽管媒体发表了很多评论，并且普遍认为银行业对政府政策制定施加了不当影响，但关于 2008 年金融危机以来银行作用的学术文献在理论上和实证上仍然存在不足。特别是，我们认为不同形式的金融权力经常被混为一谈，而有利的政策结果被太容易地假设为监管捕获的证据。简而言之，我们对银行影响力如何随时间和不同国家背景而变化、银行利益统一或分裂的程度以及银行能够产生有意义的政策结果变化的条件仍然知之甚少。本文有三个目的：1）解释为什么关于银行影响力的辩论很重要；2）审查国际金融危机以来银行影响力的证据；3) 制定一系列思考银行权力的概念工具。