Safer, but Not Safe Enough †

4Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The great divide between official analyses and economists’ views of optimal bank equity capital is not as wide as appears at first sight if the economics of risk is properly addressed. Adapting the BoE’s analysis to take account of abnormal risk conditions, a less benign view of the effectiveness of resolution regimes in systemic crisis, an international rather than domestic perspective, and a consistent approach to risk, takes one a good distance towards the economists’ view. The economic rationale for capital levels in the region of Basel III is left looking thin. It looks thinner still when, as now, price-to-book ratios are calling regulatory capital measures into question for some important banks.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vickers, J. (2019). Safer, but Not Safe Enough †. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm12030152

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free