《新资本协议》再思考:质疑、辨析与改革前瞻  

The Reflection of BaselⅡ:Question,Analysis and Perspective of the Reform

作　　者：李仁真[1] 宿营 

机构地区：[1]武汉大学国际法研究所,湖北武汉430072

出　　处：《武汉理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2010年第4期512-518,共7页Journal of Wuhan University of Technology:Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：2009年度国家社会科学基金项目(09AFX004);教育部"国际金融危机应对研究"课题项目(2009JYJR009)

摘　　要：次贷危机的爆发与蔓延对《巴赛尔新资本协议》的制度框架提出了严峻挑战,引发了人们对其资本要求的充分性,监管规则的亲周期性,依赖外部信用评级的可靠性,推行内部评级法的合理性等诸多方面的质疑。然而《新资本协议》不是导致次贷危机的主要原因,这场危机并未从根本上否定《新资本协议》的制度框架及其监管理念的科学性和合理性。面对挑战和质疑,巴塞尔委员会也作出了积极回应。《巴赛尔新资本协议》要担当起统一全球银行资本计量和资本标准的历史重任,必须进行理念创新和制度改革,改革的走向应当为:安全与效率并重,重塑监管价值目标;微观审慎与宏观审慎相辅,加强系统性风险的防范;市场约束与政府监管互补,增强监管的有效性。The outbreak and spreading of subprime mortgage crisis made a severe challenge to BaselⅡframework,and raised many questions about its supervision framework＇s rationality,especially in the aspect of the minimum capital requirement,pro-cyclical,external credit rating,internal rating based approach,etc.In fact,BaselⅡis not the main cause of the subprime mortgage crisis outbreak,and the current financial crisis does not fundamentally deny the Basel Ⅱframework,and its guiding ideology is still scientific and reasonable.Facing the challenge and questions,the Basel Committee made positive response.In the process of current international financial supervision system reform,the Basel Ⅱwill shoulder the historic responsibility to unify the global banking capital measurement and capital standards,it still must make ideology innovation and system reform.Its future direction of reform should be：attaching equal importance to safety and efficiency,reshaping the supervision value;making micro-prudential and macro-prudential support each other,enhancing prevention of system risk;making market discipline and government regulation complement each other,and enhancing the effectiveness of supervision.

关 键 词：巴塞尔新资本协议 国际银行监管 次贷危机 

分 类 号：D996.2[政治法律—经济法学]