The forgotten pillars of Basel II

As well as doubling down on complexity, Basel III represents the triumph of Pillar I capital rules and the total neglect of Pillars II and III, David Rowe argues

David Rowe

My column in the December issue of Risk, entitled Basel Faulty, elicited more numerous and more extensive comments than anything I have written in many years (Risk December 2012, page 68). Every response I received was supportive of my critical stance but they offered a variety of specific viewpoints.1

One recurring theme was that a more complex Pillar I capital calculation is having two effects:

Resources are being siphoned away from bank-specific risk systems and into prescriptive compliance

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact or view our subscription options here:

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact to find out more.

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 View our subscription options


Want to know what’s included in our free membership? Click here

This address will be used to create your account

Most read articles loading...

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

Sign in
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