The case of the missing controls?

The Basel regulators' proposals for operational risk aren't as risk-sensitive as the committee seems to think, says Tony Blunden. He argues the supervisors should pay more attention to recent developments in corporate governance.

The commitment of global banking regulators to creating a risk-sensitive capital charge that banks can make for operational risk seems not to be fully carried through in the detailed models given in the regulators' latest proposals on the subject.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the body that regulates international banking, is proposing a limited number of relatively risk-insensitive indicators to help set capital charges against operational risk. Examples of such indicators

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 info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net 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 Risk.net? View our subscription options

The changing shape of risk

S&P Global Market Intelligence’s head of credit and risk solutions reveals how firms are adjusting their strategies and capabilities to embrace a more holistic view of risk

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.

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