资本充足率规则的演变——瑞典和英国的对比案例

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Åsa Malmström Rognes
{"title":"资本充足率规则的演变——瑞典和英国的对比案例","authors":"Åsa Malmström Rognes","doi":"10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The regulation of bank capital has evolved from minimum capital requirements for joint-stock banks to elaborate risk-based capital adequacy rules. How did these regulations come about? How and why have they changed over time in different coutnries? Sweden began to regulate minimum capital in the nineteenth century. In 1911 an early version of capital adequacy was introduced. In addition to stringent regulation a separate inspection agency was given wide-ranging powers to ensure compliance. Britain also had minimum capital rules in place but during the twentieth century these two countries followed different paths in regulation and supervision of capital rules. This paper examines the Swedish case in detail and contrasts that with the British case. It is suggested that their respective civil and common law traditions may explain the divergent approaches to defining and regulating capital adequacy.","PeriodicalId":43624,"journal":{"name":"SCANDINAVIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evolution of capital adequacy rules – the contrasting cases of Sweden and Britain\",\"authors\":\"Åsa Malmström Rognes\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The regulation of bank capital has evolved from minimum capital requirements for joint-stock banks to elaborate risk-based capital adequacy rules. How did these regulations come about? How and why have they changed over time in different coutnries? Sweden began to regulate minimum capital in the nineteenth century. In 1911 an early version of capital adequacy was introduced. In addition to stringent regulation a separate inspection agency was given wide-ranging powers to ensure compliance. Britain also had minimum capital rules in place but during the twentieth century these two countries followed different paths in regulation and supervision of capital rules. This paper examines the Swedish case in detail and contrasts that with the British case. It is suggested that their respective civil and common law traditions may explain the divergent approaches to defining and regulating capital adequacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SCANDINAVIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SCANDINAVIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SCANDINAVIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.2020.1843528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要银行资本监管已从股份制银行的最低资本要求演变为制定基于风险的资本充足率规则。这些规定是怎么产生的?随着时间的推移,它们在不同的国家发生了怎样的变化,为什么会发生变化?瑞典从19世纪开始对最低资本进行监管。1911年引入了资本充足率的早期版本。除了严格的监管外,一个单独的检查机构还被赋予了广泛的权力,以确保遵守规定。英国也制定了最低资本规则,但在20世纪,这两个国家在资本规则的监管和监督方面走了不同的道路。本文详细分析了瑞典的案例,并将其与英国的案例进行了对比。有人认为,它们各自的民法和普通法传统可以解释定义和监管资本充足性的不同方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The evolution of capital adequacy rules – the contrasting cases of Sweden and Britain
ABSTRACT The regulation of bank capital has evolved from minimum capital requirements for joint-stock banks to elaborate risk-based capital adequacy rules. How did these regulations come about? How and why have they changed over time in different coutnries? Sweden began to regulate minimum capital in the nineteenth century. In 1911 an early version of capital adequacy was introduced. In addition to stringent regulation a separate inspection agency was given wide-ranging powers to ensure compliance. Britain also had minimum capital rules in place but during the twentieth century these two countries followed different paths in regulation and supervision of capital rules. This paper examines the Swedish case in detail and contrasts that with the British case. It is suggested that their respective civil and common law traditions may explain the divergent approaches to defining and regulating capital adequacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Economic History Review publishes articles and reviews in the broad field of Nordic economic, business and social history. The journal also publishes contributions from closely related fields, such as history of technology, maritime history and history of economic thought. Articles dealing with theoretical and methodological issues are also included. The editors aim to reflect contemporary research, thinking and debate in these fields, both within Scandinavia and more widely. The journal comprises a broad variety of aspects and approaches to economic and social history, ranging from macro economic history to business history, from quantitative to qualitative studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信