Basel II's New Standardized Approach: Possible Effects of Implementation
Basel II’s New Standardized Approach: Possible Effects of Implementation Katherine Wyatt New York State Banking Department Abstract The New York State Banking Department surveyed 33 institutions in 2001 and 2002 for a study of the possible effects of the Standardized Approach of the proposed New Capital Accord. Previously, the BIS Quantitative Impact Studies have focused on internationally active banks; this study provides information on the possible impact of the New Accord on domestic banks with asset size between $1 billion and $40 billion. These institutions are often grouped with community banks. The Department found that implementation of the most recent version of the Standardized Approach could lead to an average decrease of 7% in required capital for credit risk, but adding the proposed operational risk charge could bring the total capital charge on average to an increase of 12%. In addition, the estimated impact of the New Standardized Approach varies widely across institutions in the study: the change in minimum capital required for credit risk ranges from a decrease of 23% to an increase of 6%. The Basic Indicator charge for operational risk ranges from 5% of minimum regulatory capital for one savings bank to 83% of minimum required capital for a specialty bank. In this paper, we present a breakdown of the effects of the various elements of the proposed Standardized Approach, and consider a modified approach. We also analyze Call Report data for the survey banks to determine their “complexity profile” and review possible changes to their capital ratios.
Regulation of Bank Capital and Behavior of Banks: Assessing the US and the EU-15 Region Banks in the 2000-2005 Period
In recent years, regulators have increased their focus on the capital adequacy of banking institutions to enhance their stability, hence the stability of the whole financial system. The purpose of this paper is to assess and compare how American and European banks adjust their level of capital and portfolio risk under capital regulation, whether and how they react to constraints placed by the regulators. In order to do this, we estimate a modified version of the simultaneous equations model developed by Shrieves and Dahl. This model analyzes adjustments in capital and risk at banks when they approach the minimum regulatory capital level. The results indicate that regulatory requirements have the desired effect on bank behavior. Both American and European banks that are close to minimum requirements simultaneously increase their capital. In addition, the US banks decrease their portfolio risk taking.
Complexity, Network-Decisions And Alternative Risk Premia: Some New Theories Of Structural Change And Portfolio Decisions.
Structural Change is the basis for many decisions such as government fiscal and monetary policies, government interventions, corporate-expenditure decisions, corporate strategic decisions, portfolio management decisions in finance; household allocation decisions, etc.. Structural change in industries and national economies is increasingly more difficult to detect partly because of the growth and dominance of Complex Systems and “Networks” in modern industries and economies – such Networks and Complex Systems include GVCs (global value chains), retail store networks; franchising networks; internet networks; services networks; credit-chains in industries; online social networks; etc.. The relationship between Complexity and Structural Change is well established in the physics, applied math and economic dynamics literatures. Traditional definitions and modeling of structural change have erroneously focused on changes in labor, technological progress, market share, and or capital – which are grossly inadequate in the new economy and post- global financial crisis (as confirmed by changes in the global retailing and housing industries and other industries). Also the modeling of structural change seems to be constrained by the availability of data, and often omits the relationship between structural change on one hand, and globalization, financial stability and international financial contagion. This article: i) introduces the Operations Strategy Model of structural change, explains how it differs from the Lewis Model of Structural Change; and explains the often omitted relationship between operations strategy (of companies and government agencies) and structural change; ii) introduces other new Complexity-based models/theories of Structural Change in industries; iii) reviews the relationships among Operations Research, Complexity and Structural Change; iv) explains the symbiotic relationship between structural change on one hand, and economic growth, financial stability, financial contagion and globalization; v) discusses the significant gap between academic research and practice and explains some issues and factors that should be considered in the development and testing of structural change models; vi) explains how alternative risk premia can be generated from new models of Structural Change.