Search results

Debate is growing around the expansion of risk-based regulation. The regulation scholarship provides evidence of regulatory failure of the risk-based approach in different domains, including financial regulation. Therefore, this paper aims to provide cautionary evidence about the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based strategy in the financial regulation while using enterprise risk management (ERM) as a meta-regulatory toolkit.

Based on interview data gathered from 30 risk managers of banks and five regulatory personnel, combined with secondary data, this study mainly explores the challenges for meaningful use of ERM based self-regulation in regulated banks. The evidence helps to assess the risk of regulatory failure of the risk-based regulation while using ERM.

The evidence reflects that regulated banks face diverse challenges arising from both peripheral and internal environments that limit the true internalization of ERM-based self-regulation. Despite this, the regulator uses this self-regulation as a meta-regulatory toolkit under the risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory aims. However, the lack of true internalization of ERM based self-regulation is likely to raise the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory goals. Risk-based regulation is an evolving strategy in the regulatory regime. Therefore, care should be taken while using ERM as a regulatory toolkit before relying on it substantially.

The paper provides empirical insights about the challenges for effective use of ERM as a meta regulatory toolkit that might be useful practically both to the regulators and regulated firms.

This study aims to explore the relationship between risk governance characteristics (chief risk officer [CRO], chief financial officer [CFO] and senior directors [SENIOR]) and regulatory adjustments (RAs) in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development public commercial banks.

Using principal component analysis (PCA) and regression models, the research analyzes a representative data set of these banks.

A significant negative correlation between risk governance characteristics and RAs is found. Sensitivity analysis on the regulatory Tier 1 capital ratio and the total capital ratio indicates mixed outcomes, suggesting a complex relationship that warrants further exploration.

The study’s limited sample size calls for further research to confirm findings and explore risk governance’s impact on banks’ capital structures.

Enhanced risk governance could reduce RAs, influencing banking policy.

The study advocates for improved banking regulatory practices, potentially increasing sector stability and public trust.

This study contributes to understanding risk governance’s role in regulatory compliance, offering insights for policymaking in banking.

Government reforms have seen shifts from rules-based to principles-based risk regulatory governance. This paper examines the effects of principles-based risk regulatory reforms on public sector risk management (RM) and management control practices in public sector organizations (PSOs).

The principles-based regulation focuses on providing autonomy to PSOs while maintaining control over their actions without direct intervention. This resonates with Foucault's notion of how modern forms of governments operate. The research is informed by Foucault's concept of governmentality. The authors conducted a qualitative field study of an Australian PSO, gathering and analysing data from interviews, focus groups, and archival documents.

The findings show the capillary modes by which principles-based risk regulatory regime penetrates and works with management control practices in pursuit of regulatory goals within the PSO the authors studied. In addition, the authors find that the principles-based approach (focusing on autonomy) and rules-based approach (focusing on control) are not opposites in kind and effect but rather, autonomy should be understood as a central pillar of control. Furthermore, the findings show how cultural controls and formal controls are not in conflict but are interconnected in RM practices, with cultural controls providing control architecture for RM and formal control translating the control architecture into routines. Finally, the study provides insights into how enterprise risk management (ERM) provides capabilities for and routinizes RM practices in a PSO and the management control systems (MCS) that enabled this to occur.

The paper provides novel insights into how MCS are infiltrated, mobilized and deployed to enact principles-based risk regulatory reforms. These insights are useful for regulators, practitioners and researchers.

Policy or regulatory risks represent one of the major barriers for renewable energy investments, especially against the background of several retrospective reductions of support schemes in Europe. This paper aims to contribute to the literature by offering a categorization of major risk drivers and determinants of policy risk associated with renewable energy projects in developed countries.

Based on a narrative (traditional) review of the academic literature and supported by industry studies regarding cases of support scheme cuts in Europe (from the end of 2010 until the end of 2013), the paper derives determinants of policy risks of renewable energy investments.

As a main result, the paper offers a concise categorization of major risk drivers of policy and regulatory risks associated with renewable energy investments in developed countries along with potential indicators.

The derived categorization of major risk drivers and the set of indicators are of high relevance for risk management and risk assessment of renewable energy investments, where understanding the underlying risk drivers is vital. The findings can thus be applied when establishing a sound risk management for renewable energy investments.

The paper helps (potential) investors, policymakers and regulators to assess policy risks associated with renewable energy investments.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the effect of induced capital regulatory pressure on banks’ charter value and risk-taking, and the influence of bank’s charter value on its risk-taking under such a capital regulatory pressure.

The authors use two different estimations to check the robustness of the results. First, they apply a two-stage least squares mode to estimate the impact of capital requirements and bank charter value on bank risk-taking, with the influence of capital regulatory and market-force variables on bank charter value. Second, to reduce the problem of unobserved heterogeneity, the authors use dynamic panel data techniques as a check for robustness.

The empirical results show that higher capital requirements pressure brings about a lower charter value for banks, which in turn increases their risk-taking. The issue of banks’ risk-taking is also affected by their size: large banks seem to be more stable than their smaller counterparts.

The authors’ findings suggest that regulatory pressure has had the desired impact on insolvency risk for Chinese banks due to the expected penalty triggered by a breach of capital requirements.

It is the first paper that investigates the impact of capital regulatory pressure on risk-taking of the Chinese banking system, which sheds light on concerns about regulatory monitoring of bank risk and capital regulatory framework.

This paper measures the impact of capital regulation on Chinese bank charter value and risk-taking and offers some support for the implementation of Basel III in China.

The authors have constructed different measures of regulatory pressure to investigate the influence of new capital regulatory regime on banks’ behavior. Most importantly, the exogenous changes of banks’ capital ratio induced by capital regulatory pressure during the past decade that provides a unique opportunity to directly analyze the impact of capital regulatory pressure on bank charter value and risk-taking.

Strong versions of the Precautionary Principle (PP) require regulators to prohibit or impose technology controls on activities that pose uncertain risks of possibly significant environmental harm. This decision rule is conceptually unsound and would diminish social welfare. Uncertainty as such does not justify regulatory precaution. While they should reject PP, regulators should take appropriate account of societal aversion to risks of large harm and the value of obtaining additional information before allowing environmentally risky activities to proceed.

The current emphasis in anti‐money laundering (AML)/ counter terrorist financing (CTF) regulation on “risk‐based” strategies means that regulatory, law enforcement and reporting agencies need to respond to money laundering and terrorist‐financing threats in ways that are proportionate to the risks involved. However, the way that risk is conceptualized remains vague, and the requirements on agencies imposed by the risk‐based approach involve a significant element of uncertainty. The paper addresses these issues.

This paper examines the attributes of risk as it applies to AML/CTF strategy in the context of regulatory risk and related forms of risk assessment, and argues that there are a number of conditions that must be met if risk‐based decision‐making for AML/CTF is to work effectively.

This paper argues that there are a number of conditions that must be met if risk‐based decision‐making is to work effectively. Three of the most important conditions are that there has to be agreement about what risk is being decided on; there must be explicit, quantifiable models of risk, and those responsible for developing and refining risk‐based decision models must have access to knowledge about the outcomes of assessments.

The paper identifies the need for fundamental changes in the relationship between the regulators and the regulated.

Amid increased size and complexity of the banking industry, operational risk has a greater potential to occur in more harmful ways than many other sources of risk. This paper seeks to provide a succinct overview of the current regulatory framework of operational risk under the New Basel Accord with a view to inform a critical debate about the influence of data collection, loss reporting, and model specification on the consistency of risk‐sensitive capital rules.

The paper's approach is to investigate the regulatory implications of varying characteristics of operational risk and different methods to identify operational risk exposure.

The findings reveal that effective operational risk measurement hinges on how the reporting of operational risk losses and the model sensitivity of quantitative methods affect the generation of consistent risk estimates.

The presented findings offer tractable recommendations for a more coherent and consistent regulation of operational risk.

The purpose of this paper is to aid understanding of the changes in Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) regulatory strategies after the global financial crisis.

The author uses the credit valuation adjustment (CVA) charge reform as a test case for inquiring whether BCBS has departed from its pre-crisis facilitative regulatory strategy path. The regulatory strategy of the CVA charge is discussed.

The charge exhibits a new regulatory strategy that BCBS has adopted. It seeks to manipulate market structures by imposing risk-insensitive capital charge methodologies.

The paper offers a new heuristic to analyse regulatory initiatives and their significance. The CVA charge has not been subject to a regulatory theory-based analysis in prior literature.

This analysis asks whether regulatory capital requirements capture differences in systematic risk for large firms and micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs). The authors explore whether bank capital regulations intended to support SMEs’ access to borrowing are effective. The purpose of this paper is to find out whether the regulatory design (particularly the estimate of asset correlations) positively affects the lending process to small and medium enterprises, compared to large corporates.

The authors investigate the appropriateness of bank capital requirements considering default risk of loans to MSMEs and distortions in capital charges between MSMEs and large firms under the Basel III framework. The authors compiled firm-level data to capture the proportions of MSMEs and large firms in Italy during 2000–2014. The data set is drawn from financial reports of 708,041 firms over 15 years. Unlike most empirical studies that correlate assets and defaults, this study assesses a firm’s creditworthiness not by agency ratings or by sampling banks but by a specific model to estimate one-year probabilities of default.

The authors found that asset correlations increase with firms’ size and that large firms face considerably greater systematic risk than MSMEs. However, the empirical values are much lower than regulatory values. Moreover, when the authors focused on the MSME segment, systematic risk is rather stable and varies significantly with turnover. This analysis showed that the regulatory supporting factor represents a valuable attempt to treat MSME loans more fairly with respect to banks’ capital requirements. Basel III-internal ratings-based approach results show that when the supporting factor is applied, the Risk-Weighted-Assets (RWA) differences between MSMEs and large firms increase.

The implications of this research is that banking regulators to make MSMEs support more effective should review asset correlation estimation criteria, refining the fitting with empirical evidence.

The asset correlation parameter stipulated by the Basel framework is invariant with economic cycles, decreases with borrowers’ probability of default and increases with borrowers’ assets. The authors found that those relations do not hold. This way, asset correlations fall below parameters defined by regulatory formula, and SMEs’ credit risk could be overstated, resulting in a capital crunch.

The original contribution of this paper is to demonstrate that the gap between empirical and regulatory capital charge remains high. When the authors examined the Basel III-IRBA, results showed that when the supporting factor is applied, the RWA differences between MSMEs and large firms increase. This is particularly strong for loans to small- and medium-sized companies. Correctly calibrating asset correlations associated with the supporting factor eliminates regulatory distortions, reducing the gap in capital charges between loans to large corporate and MSMEs.