新兴市场国家新资本协议实施情况及其发展趋势

本文评述了新资本协议全球实施情况,重点分析了新资本协议在新兴市场国家实施的最新进展,深入剖析了新兴市场国家实施新巴塞尔协议的战略框架和路径,探讨了实施路径、实施成本、实施基础等几个核心问题,以及对我国商业银行实施新资本协议的启示。     

为百年交行创造新的核心竞争力

实施新资本协议是交通银行的必然选择新资本协议的实施将为交通银行带来全新的风险管理理念。新资本协议相比1988年协议的一个明显特点,是从纯粹强调定量指标监管转向了定量与定性理念相结合的思路。新资本协议不仅在定量计量手段上对银行提出较高的要求,同时也在     

积极实施新资本协议,打造全面风险管理领先银行——专访中国工商银行首席风险官魏国雄

自2007年2月中国银监会印发《中国银行业实施新资本协议指导意见》后,中国银行业就拉开了实施新巴塞尔资本协议（以下简称新资本协议）的序幕。 在随后的几年时间里，中国首批新资本协议银行在组织上和资源上进行了大量投入，与此同时，银监会陆续下发了14个专门的监管指引（另有部分指引尚在征求意见中）。     

积极实施新资本协议,打造全面风险管理领先银行——专访中国工商银行首席风险官魏国雄

自2007年2月中国银监会印发<中国银行业实施新资本协议指导意见>后,中国银行业就拉开了实施新巴塞尔资本协议(以下简称新资本协议)的序幕.在随后的几年时间里,中国首批新资本协议银行在组织上和资源上进行了大量投入,与此同时,银监会陆续下发了14个专门的监管指引(另有部分指引尚在征求意见中).2009年10月银监会正式启动了达标申请的预评估工作,新资本协议的实施进入最后攻坚阶段.     

资本压力下的中小银行发展探析——兼评中小银行实施新资本协议的方法与路径

2012年6月,中国银监会发布了《商业银行资本管理办法》和四个资本监管配套政策文件,标志着巴塞尔新资本协议在中国的全面实施。本文分析了新资本协议实施对中小银行的影响及其应对策略,并给出了中小银行实施新资本协议的路径选择,以期为中小银行实施新资本协议提供有益借鉴。     

巴塞尔新资本协议实施路径的国际差异比较及其发展趋势

本文比较巴塞尔新资本协议在全球实施的进展,重点比较了巴塞尔新资本协议在欧洲和美国实施的进展,从金融体系、银行结构等方面分析了两个地区实施差异的原因并讨论了巴塞尔新资本协议的实施对美国乃至全球银行竞争格局的影响。在此基础上,本文探讨了巴塞尔新资本协议实施对我国的影响,提出了相应的建议。     

中国商业银行接轨新资本协议

根据银监会实施新资本协议的规划,2010年底我国大型商业银行将先期实施新资本协议,最迟到2013年底,国内所有银行将全部实施新资本协议。尽管全球金融危机爆发中国际大型银行所暴露的问题使得巴塞尔新资本协议的有效性受到诟病,但从另一个角度看,本次金融危机恰恰又凸显了新资本协议实施的必要性和紧迫性,对于我国商业银行来说,实施新资本协议将有助于推动银行的精细化管理,改革传统的风险管理模式。从长期看,实施新资本协议的趋势已不可逆转,中国银行业即将全面进入新资本协议时代。为此,中国银行业应正视新资本协议带来的挑战,积极主动地创造条件适应实施新资本协议的要求。     

中国银行业应理性面对新资本协议

2004年6月,巴塞尔委员会发布了"统一资本计量和资本标准的国际协议:修订框架",其后以三大支柱为核心的银行风险监管体系在欧洲等发达国家和地区逐步建立。2007年2月,中国银监会发布《中国银行业实施新资本协议指导意见》,明确提出国内银行业实施新资本协议的基本方向,实施新资本协议已经成为国内大型商业银行的必然选择。本文介绍了目前国内银行业实施新资本协议的进展情况,并对目前国内银行业实施新资本协议应当注意的几个问题进行了探讨。     

恒丰银行启动新资本协议实施项目

1月中旬，恒丰银行启动了新资本协议实施项目，并在内部成立了新资本协议项目实施领导小组和新资本协议项目实施办公室。     

新资本协议的影响及中国的实践

实施新资本协议是当今、也将是今后几年国际银行业和银行监管机构关注的焦点。本文是作者在2006年7月6日韩国发展研究院(KDI)举办的“2006年推行新巴塞尔协议的会议:新资本协议的影响及亚太发展中国家的应对政策”上的发言。主要讨论了新资本协议对新兴市场的影响及中国实施新资本协议的计划两方面的内容。     

新巴塞尔协议及其对我国银行业的影响

自 1999年 6月首次征求意见稿面世以来 ,新巴塞尔协议已引起国际银行界的普遍关注。与1988年协议相比 ,新协议的内容更广泛、更复杂 ,这充分地反映了银行业的进步。毫无疑问 ,新协议的实施与推广也必将给银行业带来深刻的影响。本文在简要介绍新协议主要更新内容的基础上重点分析了它给我国银行业所带来的影响。     

巴塞尔Ⅱ来了!

无论是认识层面上的理解程度,还是实施层面中的执行深度,中国银行业要达到巴塞尔新资本协议(巴塞尔Ⅱ)的监管要求都不是一件容易的事情。它或将面临来自于宏观、中观和微观等各个层面的挑战,     

《新资本协议》对商业银行信贷运行的影响——兼论其宏观经济效应

《新资本协议》的出台和实施是银行监管历史上一个具有里程碑意义的事件。本文认为,《新资本协议》特别是内部评级法极大地提高了资本监管的风险敏感度,将对商业银行的信贷增长方式、信贷结构调整和贷款损失准备计提、以及宏观经济运行产生一定的影响。按照目前我国商业银行资本充足水平和资产质量,无论是实施标准法还是内部评级法都将强化信贷扩张的资本约束效应。我国应慎重选择《新资本协议》的实施时机,避免由此对信贷供给和宏观经济运行造成的负面冲击。     

Bank Capital Regulation in Contemporary Banking Theory: A Review of the Literature

This paper reviews the theoretical literature on bank capital regulation and analyzes some of the approaches to redesigning the 1988 Basel Accord on capital standards. The paper starts with a review of the literature on the design of the financial system and the existence of banks. It proceeds with a presentation of the market failures that justify banking regulation and an analysis of the mechanisms that have been suggested to deal with these failures. The paper then reviews the theoretical literature on bank capital regulation. This is followed by a brief history of capital regulation since the 1988 Basel Capital Accord and a presentation of both the alternative approaches that have been put forward on setting capital standards and the Basel Committee's proposal for a new capital adequacy framework.     

巴塞尔协议的演变历程梳理

巴塞尔协议在金融国际化和全球化程度不断加深的大背景之下成立并随着经济形势的变化而不断演进。巴塞尔协议经历了三个历史阶段,每一次巴塞尔协议的演进都是对前一次的补充和修订,最低资本要求是三代巴塞尔协议的核心内容之一。本文旨在对巴塞尔协议的相关文件进行逻辑梳理,为其演变历程找出清晰的脉络。     

Risk management versus operational action: Basel II in a Swedish context

The New Basel Capital Accord, Basel II, promotes standards for measurement of financial and operational risk in the banking industry. Its approach to such risk measurement has been severely criticized in the literature, inevitably raising doubts concerning the effectiveness of Basel II. Using data from 25 semi-structured interviews with banking staff in four Swedish banks, the study suggests that Basel II is well established in practice, but there are significant concerns that such measurement of risk may adversely affect banks’ activities. Whilst Basel II is generally supported by banking staff who work directly with risk measurement, its usefulness is questioned by banking staff in operations. This difference between these two groups may be explained in relation to variations in their respective frames of reference. Both groups are inclined to take account of information that meshes well with their existing frames of reference and are thus more inclined to value changes that accord with their own viewpoints. One suggestion for addressing this schism within banks is to encourage a wider debate about the various approaches to implementing Basel II.     

我国银行业市场约束对监管有效性的影响分析

巴塞尔新协议中．市场约束与最低资本要求、监督检查并列为三大支柱。市场约束可实时、连续地对银行产生影响,可以弥补创新监管和突发性风险处置滞后的缺憾,可大幅降低监管的成本、抑制银行的道德风险,对提高监管有效性具有积极意义。本文主要研究了当前我国银行业的市场约束力,分析其对监管有效性的影响．并提出相关政策建议。     

国际间统一银行监管:形成、缺陷及改进

金融的国际化和全球化令跨国银行经营的国际业务更为广泛。由于国际监管主体缺位,这促成了国际间统一银行监管标准的形成。但现行的《巴塞尔新资本协议》只是实行了部分的风险管理,忽视了新兴市场国家的具体国情。因此,国际银行监管体系应综合分析整个金融机构的风险状况,建立全面的风险管理架构,保持监管标准的灵活性,加强国际监管协调和国内监管合作,强化市场约束,增强市场透明度。     

Sub‐Optimality of Income Statement‐Based Methods for Measuring Operational Risk under Basel II: Empirical Evidence from Spanish Banks

The New Basel Capital Accord (Basel II) was created with the intention of establishing a framework in which financial entities can manage their risks in a more detailed and efficient way. Within this general reform movement, Operational Risk emerges as a fundamental variable. OR can be managed by three alternative methods: the Basic Indicator Approach, Standard Approach and Advanced Measurement Approach. The choice of which method to adopt has become of supreme interest for senior banking managers. This study analyzes the exactitude of the underlying implicit hypotheses that support each method, distinguishing between income statement based methods and the management accounting based method. In the present study the non‐optimum character of the two Income Statement‐based methods is empirically confirmed, in the light of the data provided by Spanish financial entities.     

Effects of the New Basel Capital Accord on Bank Capital Requirements for SMEs

Using data from three countries (US, Italy and Australia) and surveying related studies from several other countries in Europe, we investigate the effects of the New Basel Capital Accord on bank capital requirements for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). We find that, for all the countries, banks will have significant benefits, in terms of lower capital requirements, when considering small and medium sized firms as retail customers. But they will be obliged to use the Advanced IRB approach and to manage them on a pooled basis. For SMEs as corporate, however, capital requirements will be slightly greater than under the existing Basel I Capital Accord. We believe that most eligible banks will use a blended approach (considering some SMEs as retail and some as corporate). Through a breakeven analysis, we find that for all of our countries, banking organizations will be obliged to classify as retail at least 20% of their SME portfolio in order to maintain the current capital requirement (8%). JEL classification: G21, G28