scholarly journals Crisis Management and Resolution for a European Banking System

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 (070) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Daniel Hardy ◽  
Luis Cortavarria-Checkley ◽  
Alessandro Giustiniani ◽  
Wim Fonteyne ◽  
Wouter Bossu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Banking System ◽  
European Banking

Crisis Management and Resolution for a European Banking System

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wim Fonteyne ◽  
Wouter Bossu ◽  
Luis A Cortavarria ◽  
Alessandro Giustiniani ◽  
Alessandro Gullo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Banking System ◽  
European Banking

Same Story, Different Place?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viral V. Acharya ◽  
Tim Eisert ◽  
Christian Eufinger ◽  
Christian Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Banking Sector ◽  
Debt Crisis ◽  
Banking System ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Balance Sheets ◽  
System P ◽  
Loan Supply ◽  
European Banking ◽  
European Debt Crisis

This chapter compares the recapitalizations of the Japanese banking sector in the 1990s with those in the ongoing European debt crisis. The analysis points to four main policy implications. First, recapitalizing banks by insuring or purchasing troubled assets alone is not likely to solve the problem of banks’ weak capitalization, as this measure is not able to adjust the extent of the recapitalization to the banks’ specific needs. Second, the amount of the recapitalization should be based on actual capital shortages and not risk-weighted assets to avoid banks decreasing their loan supply. Third, banks should face restrictions regarding the amount of dividends they are allowed to pay out. Finally, banks must be induced to clean up their balance sheets and reduce the amount of bad (non-performing) loans to rebuild confidence in the European banking system.

scholarly journals Ranking of EU national banking systems using multi-criteria analysis in the light of Brexit

2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Radulescu ◽  
Aleksandra Fedajev ◽  
Djordje Nikolic
Keyword(s):  
System Analysis ◽  
Banking System ◽  
Entropy Method ◽  
Banking Union ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Promethee Ii ◽  
Banking Systems ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Banking ◽  
Multi Criteria Analysis

In order to define and implement the most effective measures to overcome the difficulties of the post-crisis period, the policy-makers of ECB must identify not just main weaknesses of each banking system, but their strong points also. This requires the application of multi-criteria analysis, considering that policy-makers need to take into account a number of different aspects that, on the whole, indicate the quality of the banking system. Our aim is a comparative analysis of European banking systems right after the Brexit moment and within the framework of the tight new Basel III regulations. In this paper, we have ranked the banking systems of the 28 EU member states using multi-criteria analysis, specifically the PROMETHEE II method. The use of the PROMETHEE II method in combination with the entropy method offers a comprehensive insight into the banking system of each member state, given that the observed countries are ranked according to 9 conflicting criteria that are mostly used in banking system analysis. Our analysis shows that the banking systems in Central and Eastern Europe are the best performers, while the EMU’s developed banking systems such as the German, Italian, British, and French one are positioned among the last ranked. The Portuguese and Greek banking systems are, as expected, ranked in the last positions in our list. The obtained results also pointed out that the ECB should change its approach to the management and further development of a European Banking Union.

EWU-Krisenmanagement: Warum die Politik auf dem richtigen Weg ist

2012 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Werner Becker ◽  
Horst Löchel
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Euro Area ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Banking Union ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
European Banking Union ◽  
Short Run ◽  
European Banking ◽  
Great Persistence ◽  
The Right

SummaryWith troubles in the European Monetary Union (EMU) showing great persistence, the emergency measures and ad-hoc crisis management of European authorities has been subject to harsh criticism. The current fierce debate among economists and the broad public has given rise to two camps advocating fundamentally different approaches how to exit the sustained crisis. While according to the Integrationists′ view, the only viable way to get rid of pressing debt problems and to restore confidence in the Euro area lies in a common guarantee for national debt obligations, so-called Minimalists advocate a strict return to the cornerstones of the Maastricht Treaty, in particular strict compliance with the debt and deficit limits laid out by the Treaty as well as a credible application of the ‚no-bail-out‘ rule. However, in their pure form, both strategies do not serve for a timely and effective crisis management as they either require a level of supranational integration that - given the still prevalent Westphalian order - cannot be attained in the short run nor is it on the agenda of European policy, or essentially deny the significant flaws within the EMU architecture that failed to prevent current fiscal woes.The current crisis management of European authorities has followed neither of the two extremes but has taken a viable middle-of-the-road approach that resulted in useful and necessary repairs to the institutional architecture of the Euro area, most notably the establishment of the commonly guaranteed stability mechanisms EFSF and ESM as well as the first steps taken towards a European banking union. Hence, in contrast to most observers, we argue that the European authorities, by operating a prudent stepby- step approach, are on the right track towards solving the current crisis. As a result, European Central Bank could move back to its original approach of monetary policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document