{"title":"银行业的风险承担和偿付能力监管-注","authors":"Franz R. Hahn","doi":"10.3790/KUK.43.3.339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a dynamic setting intertemporal effects can arise that render capital rules in banking as advocated by the Basel Committee of Banking Supervision counterproductive. It is quite possible that the banks' desire for excessive risk-taking is being reinforced by a binding capital rule such as the Basel risk-based capital requirement. In this paper an attempt is made to explore the impact of the so-called precommitment approach, proposed as an alternative to risk-based minimum capital rules, on the risk-taking behavior of banks. According to this proposal banks are free to self-assess their maximum possible losses, but make a commitment to the regulator to hold at least as much capital as is needed to cover these losses. It turns out that in a standard dynamic setting the precommitment approach is superior to the prevailing minimum capital rule in that the risk-neutral bank which maximizes its expected value of equity subject to a precommitted liquidity constraint chooses a risk-level which is socially optimal.","PeriodicalId":280048,"journal":{"name":"Kredit Und Kapital","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk-Taking and Solvency Regulation in Banking – A Note –\",\"authors\":\"Franz R. Hahn\",\"doi\":\"10.3790/KUK.43.3.339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a dynamic setting intertemporal effects can arise that render capital rules in banking as advocated by the Basel Committee of Banking Supervision counterproductive. It is quite possible that the banks' desire for excessive risk-taking is being reinforced by a binding capital rule such as the Basel risk-based capital requirement. In this paper an attempt is made to explore the impact of the so-called precommitment approach, proposed as an alternative to risk-based minimum capital rules, on the risk-taking behavior of banks. According to this proposal banks are free to self-assess their maximum possible losses, but make a commitment to the regulator to hold at least as much capital as is needed to cover these losses. It turns out that in a standard dynamic setting the precommitment approach is superior to the prevailing minimum capital rule in that the risk-neutral bank which maximizes its expected value of equity subject to a precommitted liquidity constraint chooses a risk-level which is socially optimal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":280048,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kredit Und Kapital\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kredit Und Kapital\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3790/KUK.43.3.339\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kredit Und Kapital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3790/KUK.43.3.339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
在动态环境下,可能出现跨期效应,使巴塞尔银行监管委员会(Basel Committee of banking Supervision)所倡导的银行业资本规则产生反效果。巴塞尔基于风险的资本要求等具有约束力的资本规则,很有可能强化了银行过度冒险的愿望。本文试图探讨所谓的预承诺方法对银行冒险行为的影响,该方法被提议作为基于风险的最低资本规则的替代方案。根据这一提议,银行可以自由地自我评估其最大可能损失,但要向监管机构承诺,至少持有弥补这些损失所需的资本。结果表明,在标准动态环境下,预先承诺方法优于现行的最低资本规则,因为风险中性银行在预先承诺的流动性约束下,使其权益期望值最大化,从而选择社会最优的风险水平。
Risk-Taking and Solvency Regulation in Banking – A Note –
In a dynamic setting intertemporal effects can arise that render capital rules in banking as advocated by the Basel Committee of Banking Supervision counterproductive. It is quite possible that the banks' desire for excessive risk-taking is being reinforced by a binding capital rule such as the Basel risk-based capital requirement. In this paper an attempt is made to explore the impact of the so-called precommitment approach, proposed as an alternative to risk-based minimum capital rules, on the risk-taking behavior of banks. According to this proposal banks are free to self-assess their maximum possible losses, but make a commitment to the regulator to hold at least as much capital as is needed to cover these losses. It turns out that in a standard dynamic setting the precommitment approach is superior to the prevailing minimum capital rule in that the risk-neutral bank which maximizes its expected value of equity subject to a precommitted liquidity constraint chooses a risk-level which is socially optimal.