ESRB published a report that presents initial considerations on the development and use of a common framework for the macro-prudential policy stance. The macro-prudential policy stance is considered in this report by assessing the balance between identified systemic risk and resilience relative to financial stability objectives, given the implemented macro-prudential policies.
The report first outlines the motivation for a framework for the macro-prudential policy stance and explains how a macro-prudential instrument is used as a policy lever by authorities for macro-prudential purposes. It then presents one potential macro-prudential stance framework that, when "operationalized," would aim to support policymakers in their assessment of risks, resilience, and implemented policies. The risk-resilience framework was chosen as the approach to the stance framework as one which fits in with the existing macro-prudential policy strategies, which could be used to take into account the many facets of macro-prudential policy and which could potentially be developed further. Next, the report focuses on the measurement of the macro-prudential stance and discusses the interactions and aggregation of various stance components, also outlining challenges related to macro-prudential policy objectives, macro-prudential instruments, and the relationship between the two. Finally, the report presents next steps and concludes that the risk-resilience framework has been considered appropriate to utilize as the foundation for the macro-prudential stance assessments.
In the report, it has been proposed that the assessment of the macro-prudential stance and policy action is a two-tier process, with the stance assessment of implemented policy measures being separate from the assessment of costs and benefits of potential adjustments to macro-prudential policy. It is envisaged that the work on the conceptual aspects of the macro-prudential stance framework would be further developed into an operational framework over the medium term. Macro-prudential authorities could use such a framework when conducting their assessment of risk and resilience and analyzing the appropriateness of their macro-prudential responses. This would require the development of a quantitative concept that is transparent and flexible enough to allow and encourage implementation by national authorities.
The second phase of the work on the macro-prudential stance may advance the concepts of the Growth-at-Risk model, the use of stress testing, and the understanding of the aggregation of stances. In addition, as with all applications of policy, efficient and effective communication is critical to successful implementation; therefore, further efforts could be made in determining the best approach to communicating decisions made after a macro-prudential policy stance assessment. The next step to further develop the presented concepts requires cooperation among the ESRB membership and ESRB working groups. It is envisaged that the "operationalization" of the macro-prudential stance framework will have a significant positive impact on the progression and understanding of macro-prudential policy across Europe.
Related Link: Report (PDF)
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Risk-Resilience Framework, Systemic Risk, Macro-Prudential Policy, Financial Stability, ESRB
Previous ArticleECB Publishes Results of Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process
Next ArticleRBNZ Consults on Framework for Identifying D-SIBs
EBA finalized the two sets of draft regulatory technical standards on the identification of material risk-takers and on the classes of instruments used for remuneration under the Investment Firms Directive (IFD).
EC published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a notification that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has published a special report on resolution planning in the Single Resolution Mechanism.
BoE published a scenario against which it will be stress testing banks in 2021, in addition to setting out the key elements of the 2021 stress test, guidance on the 2021 stress test, and the variable paths for the 2021 stress test.
PRA published a consultation paper (CP3/21) proposes rules regarding the timing of identity verification required for eligibility of depositor protection under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
FSB published the work program for 2021, which reflects a strategic shift in priorities in the COVID-19 environment.
FCA announced that 50% firms have started using the new data collection platform RegData, which is slated to replace the existing platform known Gabriel.
Bundesbank published Version 5.0 of the derivation rules for completeness check at the form level, with respect to the data quality of the European harmonized reporting system.
FED finalized a rule that updates capital planning requirements to reflect the new framework from 2019 that sorts large banks into categories, with requirements that are tailored to the risks of each category.
ECB published results of the quarterly lending survey conducted on 143 banks in the euro area.
ESAs published the final draft implementing technical standards on reporting of intra-group transactions and risk concentration of financial conglomerates subject to the supplementary supervision in EU.