17/1 Malaya Ordynka Str., Moscow, 119017
Leonid M. Grigoryev
Natalia V. Supyan
World Economy Section
Section of Energy and Raw Material Market
Valery A. Krukov
World Trade Section
Alexey Pavlovich Portanskiy
Section of Global Economic Regulation
Vladimir N. Zuev
Yakovleva A., Y., Volkova I.O.
Vol. 188. Prt. 012011. Iss. 1: conference. IOP Publishing, 2018.
Dzhagityan E. P.
International Organisations Research Journal. 2019. No. 2.
In bk.: XX Апрельская международная научная конференция по проблемам развития экономики и общества. 9–12. апреля 2019. M.: Higher School of Economics Publishing House, 2019.
Stepanov I. A., Albrecht J.
Economics. EC. Высшая школа экономики, 2019. No. 211.
The article looks into the specifics and perspectives of an optimal model of international banking regulation using the macroprudential policy mechanism. It is demonstrated that the contemporary macroprudentialism is closely linked with microprudential banking regulation, while its importance should be considered in the context of systemic risks mitigation, higher stress-resilience of the banking sector and financial stability.
At the same time, the broader conceptual framework of macroprudential regulation (MPR) has not yet been finalized. The period of its validation in the countries that joined Basel III mechanism has not proved to be sufficient in understanding the causes and sources of systemic risks. Besides, MPR still lacks the tools that would most objectively assess the its effectiveness, despite the recommendations of the G20 meetings and the actual integration of MPR into the post-crisis banking regulation system. International regulators are on their way of just approaching the understanding the effectiveness criteria of MPR in the context of the systemic risks duality: Their homogeneity and diversification that applies to the aspect of institutional linkages; and multiplication (contagion effect) and transmission (time series aspect). In his article, Dr Dzhagityan substantiates the criticality of the extended use of macroprudential policy tools, which in turn can expand the horizons of systemic risks forecasting and allow a better understanding of the specifics of SIFIs (systemically important financial institutions) through the prism of macro-level indicators and financial cycles. Today, MPR has become a unique regulatory instrument to reduce the stress level in the banking sector; however, it is still deficient in power to ensure financial stability. The article identifies the weaknesses of MPR and systematizes the issues that are to be considered in the framework of further integration of the MPR system into the post-crisis regulatory paradigm.