IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oec/dafkad/5kmn0vzk29g6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The elephant in the room: The need to deal with what banks do

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Blundell-Wignall
  • Gert Wehinger
  • Patrick Slovik

Abstract

Contagion risk and counterparty failure have been the main hallmarks of the current crisis. While some large diversified banks that focused mainly on commercial banking survived very well, others suffered crippling losses. Sound corporate governance and strong riskmanagement culture should enable banks to avoid excessive leverage and risk taking. The question is whether there is a better way, via leverage rules or rules on the structures of large conglomerates, to ensure volatile investment banking functions do not dominate the future stability of the commercial banking and financial intermediation environment that is so critical for economic activity. While there is a main consensus on the need for reform of capital rules, dynamic provisioning, better co-operation for future crises, centralised trading of derivatives etc., the question is whether such reforms will be sufficient if they do not address contagion and counterparty risk directly. The world outside of policy making is waiting for a fundamental reassessment of banks’ business models: what banks are supposed to do and how they compete with each other. It is the “elephant in the room” on which some policy makers have not yet had the time or inclination to focus. This article emphasises not only the need for transparent and comparable accounting rules and for improvements in corporate governance, but also supports the imposition of a group leverage ratio to provide a binding capital constraint (that Basel riskweighted rules have been unable to achieve) and proposes a Non- Operating Holding Company Structure (NOHC) – reforms that are essential to deal with contagion and counterparty risk that are so integral to the ‘too big to fail’ issue.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Blundell-Wignall & Gert Wehinger & Patrick Slovik, 2010. "The elephant in the room: The need to deal with what banks do," OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends, OECD Publishing, vol. 2009(2), pages 1-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:dafkad:5kmn0vzk29g6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/fmt-v2009-art11-en
    Download Restriction: Full text available to READ online. PDF download available to OECD iLibrary subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. William R. White, 2014. "The Prudential Regulation of Financial Institutions: Why Regulatory Responses to the Crisis Might Not Prove Sufficient," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1108, OECD Publishing.
    2. Adrian Blundell-Wignall & Caroline Roulet, 2013. "Business models of banks, leverage and the distance-to-default," OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends, OECD Publishing, vol. 2012(2), pages 7-34.
    3. Gunnar Lang & Michael Schröder, 2013. "Do We Need a Separate Banking System? An Assessment," Credit and Capital Markets, Credit and Capital Markets, vol. 46(3), pages 331-355.
    4. Sergio Masciantonio & Andrea Tiseno, 2013. "The rise and fall of universal banking: ups and downs of a sample of large and complex financial institutions since the late �90s," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 164, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Paul Atkinson & Adrian Blundell-Wignall & Caroline Roulet, 2013. "Integration versus Interdependence and Complexity in Global Trade and Finance in the Post-War Period," SUERF 50th Anniversary Volume Chapters, SUERF - The European Money and Finance Forum.
    6. Giuseppe Mastromatteo & Giuseppe Mastromatteo, 2016. "Minsky at Basel: A Global Cap to Build an Effective Postcrisis Banking Supervision Framework," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_875, Levy Economics Institute.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:dafkad:5kmn0vzk29g6. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/oecddfr.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.