1 / 31

Risk Based Supervision under Basel II Jeffrey Carmichael

Risk Based Supervision under Basel II Jeffrey Carmichael. Cartagena February 16-18, 2004. Outline. What is the risk based approach? How does it apply to banks? How does it apply to regulation? How does it apply to supervision? Challenges arising from Basel II.

Download Presentation

Risk Based Supervision under Basel II Jeffrey Carmichael

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Risk Based Supervision under Basel IIJeffrey Carmichael Cartagena February 16-18, 2004

  2. Outline • What is the risk based approach? • How does it apply to banks? • How does it apply to regulation? • How does it apply to supervision? • Challenges arising from Basel II Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  3. What is the Risk-Based Approach? • No universally-accepted definition • Meaning depends on the situation • Most widely accepted proposition would be that a risk-based approach requires that you: • Identify risks and apply resources where the risks are greatest Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  4. 1. How Does this Apply to Banking? • Major sources of banking risk: • Credit Risk • Market Risk • Liquidity Risk • Operational Risk • Question: Which is the greatest risk? Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  5. Experience Late 80s & Early 90s • Widely agreed that credit risk is dominant - experience in the 80s/90s was good reminder • Developed markets - worst loan losses for 50 years • Common characteristics: • excessive exposures to individual borrowers • excessive exposures to sectors • excessive reliance on collateral • poor credit evaluation • All arose primarily from credit risk Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  6. RMA & FMCG Survey Better Credit Mgt. = Higher & More Stable Returns Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  7. Also Found ... Payback to better risk management goes beyond protecting share price • helped better serve customer needs • enabled better business decisions Returns to investing in risk management are very high • compared losses under best practice with cost of improvements - suggested return of 1,000% over 10 years Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  8. Main Advances Since Then • Improved data management • Improved credit grading from one-dimensional to two dimensional (PD and LGD) • Shift to portfolio risk assessment • Credit risk modelling • Risk-based pricing, provisioning and reward structures • Integrated risk management • Risk-based capital allocation Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  9. Motivation for Advances • Bankers remember the pain • Shareholders react to differential losses • Competition is increasing • The tools are available • There is more to lose (rewards are tied to performance) Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  10. 2. “Risk-Based” Regulation • The central Pillar of banking regulation is capital adequacy • Starting with the first Capital Accord in 1988 banking regulators began imposing risk-weighted capital adequacy requirement • The philosophy is straightforward - greater risk requires greater capital Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  11. Interaction Between Regulation and Banking Practice • As noted - banks now allocate capital internally to activities and areas according to the risks taken • Not widespread before the first Basel Accord in 1988 • Accord encouraged banks to think in terms of risk-based capital allocation • Since then, banks have generally gone well beyond the 1988 Accord - hence one of the primary motivations for Basel II … • Case for change is in the divergence between regulatory capital and banks’ assessments of economic capital required for risk - illustration …. Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  12. Economic Vs Regulatory Capital Economic Basel I 8% Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  13. The Challenge for Basel II • Need for greater risk sensitivity than Basel 1 and its “one size fits all” Approach • Need for a framework that is credible, sound and reflective of industry practices • Need to be more incentive compatible with desire of regulators to promote and enhance good credit risk management • Problem - there is no standardized approach agreed by industry for the measurement and management of credit risk (unlike market risk) Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  14. The Outcome • A “menu” approach: • Standardized (modified from Basel I); • IRB Foundation • IRB Advanced • Standardized is still “blunt” like Basel I • IRB approaches are an attempt to “approximate” what the industry is doing • It stops short of allowing banks to use their own models entirely for assessing capital adequacy • It allows banks to use some of the critical inputs to their models (PD, LGD, EAD) but constrains the way they are combined to assess capital adequacy Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  15. 3. “Risk-Based” Supervision • Again the idea of a risk-based approach = apply resources where the risks are greatest • Thus a supervisor following a risk-based approach will attempt to: • Identify those banks in which risks are greatest • Identify within each bank those areas in which risks are greatest • Apply scarce supervisory resources so as to minimizing the overall “regulatory” risk Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  16. Risk Rating Banks • Most regulators use some form of rating system (e.g. CAMELS) for banks • Following the experience of banks many have moved to a two-dimensional grading scale; e.g. • PF - probability of failure • CGF - (systemic) consequences given failure Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  17. Example - PAIRS • APRA Reviewed developments in US, UK and Canada • Developed PAIRS system (Probability and Impact Rating System) • As in banking - risk grading system should not eliminate subjectivity but the discipline imposed by a structured approach should increase objectivity • Back up with peer review and quality control Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  18. Conceptual Framework for PF Inherent Risk _ Management & Control Risk of FailurePF _ Capital Support Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  19. The Structured Approach • The Impact rating is based largely on size - with some management over-ride if needed • PF x Impact (CGF) = index of supervisory attention • The Index of Supervisory Attention is exponential from 1 to 56,000 • The Index is grouped into: • Normal • Oversight • Mandated Improvement • Restructure Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  20. Supervisory Attention Grid Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  21. Beyond Risk Grading • Risk-based supervision requires better risk grading to identify the institutions posing the greatest risks • It also requires targeted inspections and investigations • It requires judgement and graduated supervisory responses • This is where Basel II has focused its attention through Pillar 2 Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  22. Pillar 2 - Supervisory Review • Philosophy: • Pillar 1 Capital Framework is only an approximation - it is not entirely comprehensive • Capital is critical in mitigating risk but it is not the only relevant factor - a bank should have sound processes and procedures for measuring, monitoring and managing risk Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  23. Supervisory Review Process • Use tools available to assess how accurately Pillar 1 matches minimum capital with risks taken by the bank • Use tools available to understand how strong a bank’s processes & procedures are and how well they are implemented • Use supervisory judgement to impose additional supervisory requirements (including capital) where residual risk is excessive Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  24. Assessing the Adequacy of a Bank’s Capital • Principle 1: Banks should have a process for assessing capital relative to risks and a strategy for maintaining it • Supervisors: • Review the risk assessment processes for relevance and comprehensiveness - does the bank recognise other risks such as interest rate risk? • Identify inconsistencies • Check that management is engaged • Assess application and controls - are processes followed? • Require stress tests Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  25. Specific Guidance • Interest Rate Risk in the banking book • Operational Risk • Definition of default • Risk mitigation • Concentration Risk • Securitization Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  26. Demands Related to IRB • Banks that choose IRB need to meet a series of demanding qualifying and validation criteria • These have been set out in detail by the Basel Committee - along with guidance about what and how to check • The on-going monitoring of the appropriateness and application of these model-based risk management processes is a fundamental part of Pillar 2 supervisory review - especially stress testing Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  27. Responding to Assessed Risks • Principle 2: Supervisors should take enforcement action if not satisfied with a bank’s approach to risk management • Principle 3: Supervisors should expect banks to hold above the minimum and should be able to require them to do so • Principle 4: Supervisors should intervene early to prevent capital falling through the minimum Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  28. Is Pillar 2 Really Anything New? • To the extent that Pillar 2 emphasises: • Assessment of risks • Supervisory judgement & discretion • Active enforcement • It is just an extension of the already growing risk-based approach to supervision • It does provide detailed guidance - but many countries already exercised this type of approach • Problem was - not all countries could! • Pillar 2 formalises the central role of flexibility • Without that flexibility Basel II is a waste of time Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  29. Summary • The “risk-based” approach is about identifying risks and devoting resources to where they will be most effective in reducing risks • This approach is as critical in banking as it is in regulation and supervision • In regulation it requires that capital requirements are greater where risks are greater • In supervision it requires supervisors to: • Assess where the risks are greatest • Intervene and enforce standards flexibly where the risks are greatest • Pillar 2 of Basel II provides a framework for the assessment and intervention process • Pillar 2 is a fundamental component of Basel II Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  30. Thank You Presentation: Jeff Carmichael

  31. Risk-Based Supervision: Challenges under Basel II ARMICHAEL ONSULTING Pty Ltd

More Related