The Governance Of Macroprudential Policy

The countercyclical capital buffer (CCB) was proposed by the Basel committee to increase the resilience of the banking sector to negative shocks. The interactions between banking sector losses and the real economy highlight the importance of building a capital buffer in periods when systemic risks are rising. Basel III introduces a framework for a time-varying capital buffer on top of the minimum capital requirement and another time-invariant buffer (the conservation buffer). The CCB aims to make banks more resilient against imbalances in credit markets and thereby enhance medium-term prospects of the economy—in good times when system-wide risks are growing, the regulators could impose the CCB which would help the banks to withstand losses in bad times.

MCM conducted a survey in December 2010 to take stock of international experiences with financial stability and the evolving macroprudential policy framework. The survey was designed to seek information in three broad areas: the institutional setup for macroprudential policy, the analytical approach to systemic risk monitoring, and the macroprudential policy toolkit. The survey was sent to 63 countries and the European Central Bank (ECB), including all countries in the G-20 and those subject to mandatory Financial Sector Assessment Programs (FSAPs). The target list is designed to cover a broad range of jurisdictions in all regions, but more weight is given to economies that are systemically important (see Annex for details). The response rate is 80 percent. This note provides a summary of the survey’s main findings.

Macroprudential policy is a complement to microprudential policy and it interacts with other types of public policy that have an impact on systemic financial stability. Indeed, prudential regulation, as carried out in the past, also had some macroprudential aspects, and the recent crisis has reinforced this focus; hence, a clear separation between “micro” and “macro” prudential, if useful conceptually, is difficult to delineate in practice. Moreover, no matter how different policy mandates are structured, financial stability tends to be a common responsibility, reflecting the far reaching consequences of financial crises. This calls for coordination across policies, to ensure that systemic risk is comprehensively addressed. Equally important, macroprudential policy is no substitute for sound policies more broadly, including, in particular, strong prudential regulation and supervision, and sound macroeconomic policies. Operational independence in other policy areas, including monetary and microprudential policy, should not be undermined in the name of macroprudential policy. Finally, given the global nature of the financial system, the multilateral aspects of macroprudential policy will need to be fully considered—an important aspect that is only touched upon in this paper.

Macroprudential policy focuses on the financial system as a whole, as distinct from individual institutions, and its objective is to limit the costs to the real economy from system-wide distress of the financial sector. This book helps readers discover and decipher the multi-faceted and fascinating area of macroprudential policy through taking a theoretical, interdisciplinary and legal-focused approach.

This book critically examines the theoretical foundations and legal framework for macroprudential policy, its tools and governance in the UK, the US, and the EU. It goes deeper into a normative discussion of the legitimacy of macroprudential policy in these jurisdictions, where the mandate for maintaining financial stability has been delegated to independent authorities. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008 reopened debates regarding legitimacy of the independent regulatory state, given its democratic deficit. The response to a perceived legitimacy gap has been to increase political oversight in financial policymaking and regulation. The book posits that the real problem is not a lack of democracy, but rather a lack of social justice. Across the globe, there is growing dissatisfaction with a financial system and regulatory process that appear depersonalised and perpetuate inequalities. Citizens are calling for more socially just systems of governance and the future success of financial policymakers and regulators will hinge on this. Given the marked distributional effects that have been noted in some macroprudential policy tools, the book questions whether macroprudential policy should be solely based on highly rationalised and strongly quantitative reasons. By proposing that macroprudential policymakers should have a social justice mandate alongside their financial stability mandate, as well as legal mechanisms for operationalising the added authority, the book contributes to the growing discourse on the role of social justice in public policy.

A framework for macroprudential regulation that defines systemic risk and macroprudential policy, describes macroprudential tools, and surveys the effectiveness of existing macroprudential regulation. The recent financial crisis has shattered all standard approaches to banking regulation. Regulators now recognize that banking regulation cannot be simply based on individual financial institutions' risks. Instead, systemic risk and macroprudential regulation have come to the forefront of the new regulatory paradigm. Yet our knowledge of these two core aspects of regulation is still limited and fragmented. This book offers a framework for understanding the reasons for the regulatory shift from a microprudential to a macroprudential approach to financial regulation. It defines systemic risk and macroprudential policy, cutting through the generalized confusion as to their meaning; contrasts macroprudential to microprudential approaches; discusses the interaction of macroprudential policy with macroeconomic policy (monetary policy in particular); and describes macroprudential tools and experiences with macroprudential regulation around the world. The book also considers the remaining challenges for establishing effective macroprudential policy and broader issues in regulatory reform. These include the optimal size and structure of the financial system, the multiplicity of regulatory bodies in the United States, the supervision of cross-border financial institutions, and the need for international cooperation on macroprudential policies.

The crisis has underscored the costs of systemic instability at both the national and the global levels and highlighted the need for dedicated macroprudential policies to achieve financial stability. Building on recent advances, this paper provides a framework to inform the IMF’s country-specific advice on macroprudential policy. It recognizes that developing macroprudential policy is a work in progress, and addresses key issues to help ensure its effectiveness.

The interaction between credit frictions, financial innovation, and a switch from optimistic to pessimistic beliefs played a central role in the 2008 financial crisis. This paper develops a quantitative general equilibrium framework in which this interaction drives the financial amplification mechanism to study the effects of macro-prudential policy. Financial innovation enhances the ability of agents to collateralize assets into debt, but the riskiness of this new regime can only be learned over time. Beliefs about transition probabilities across states with high and low ability to borrow change as agents learn from observed realizations of financial conditions. At the same time, the collateral constraint introduces a pecuniary externality, because agents fail to internalize the effect of their borrowing decisions on asset prices. Quantitative analysis shows that the effectiveness of macro-prudential policy in this environment depends on the government's information set, the tightness of credit constraints and the pace at which optimism surges in the early stages of financial innovation. The policy is least effective when the government is as uninformed as private agents, credit constraints are tight, and optimism builds quickly.