Ignoring the lessons for effective prudential supervision, failed bank resolution and depositor protection
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to establish three sets of principles – the first for effective prudential supervision of financial institutions; the second for the timely resolution of failed institutions and the management of financial crises; and the third for the successful protection of deposits. It also aims to show how these principles have been eschewed, especially in the USA and the UK. Design/methodology/approach - The first set of principles and examples of their violation are determined from material loss reviews conducted by agency inspectors general, government reports, and academic research. The second set of principles is derived from International Monetary Fund practice and research; violations are those reported in government reports, published research, and press articles. The third set of principles is chosen from those proposed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the International Association of Deposit Insurers. Violations are those reported in academic and practitioner research and the press. Findings - Many of the three sets of principles have been ignored in the current financial crisis. Research limitations/implications - Experience in previous crises has shown that eschewing these principles delays the resolution of individual failed institutions, increases resolutions costs, and delays the recover from the crisis. If the legal and regulatory system is to be reformed appropriately to prevent a recurrence, future research must discover the reasons why the principles have not been followed. Originality/value - The paper assembles three sets of principles and instances where they have been violated in order to help policymakers, practitioners and researchers to focus on where and what reforms are needed to prevent a recurrence of the current severe financial crisis.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 17 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=jfrc Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jfrcpp:v:17:y:2009:i:3:p:186-209. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.