メインコンテンツに移動

Letter to the editor: a response to Cosandey and Wolf’s Avoiding pro-cyclicality

From Thomas Garside, managing director, finance and risk management, and Christian Pedersen, senior manager, Oliver, Wyman & Company, London

comment-graph-gif

Much has been written on the proposed changes to the Basel Accord (Basel II), and we have been surprised that the vast majority of both academic and practitioner literature focuses on the prescriptive regulatory approaches and formulas to calculate minimum capital requirements under Pillar I. In our opinion, it is actually the introduction of Pillars II and III that will have a greater

コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。

これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

無料メンバーシップの内容をお知りになりたいですか?ここをクリック

パスワードを表示
パスワードを非表示にする

Most read articles loading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

ログイン
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here