Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.
Terms of use:
Documents in
Statement of purpose:The purpose of these working papers is to promote the circulation of research results (Research Series) and analytical studies (Documents Series) made within the National Bank of Belgium or presented by external economists in seminars, conferences and conventions organised by the Bank. The aim is therefore to provide a platform for discussion. The opinions expressed are strictly those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bank of Belgium.
OrdersFor orders and information on subscriptions and reductions: National Bank of Belgium, Documentation -Publications service, boulevard de Berlaimont 14, 1000 Brussels.
The purpose of this paper is to see whether and how G-10 banks have complied with the 1988 Basel Accord. The interest of this study lies in the fact that the standardized approach to credit risk in the New Basel Accord is conceptually similar to the 1988 agreement. However, very little is known about the reaction of non-US banks to the imposition of minimum capital requirements that make use of risk-weight categories. Building on previous studies, this paper uses a simultaneous equations model to analyze adjustments in capital and credit risk at banks from G-10 countries over the 1988-95 period. The results show that regulatory pressure was successful in raising the capital to assets ratios of undercapitalized banks in Canada, Japan, the UK and the US but not in France and Italy. In addition, there is no evidence that undercapitalized G-10 banks increased or decreased their credit risk over the period studied. Interestingly, these findings are robust to the inclusion of a variable measuring the role of market discipline in influencing bank capital and risk choices. All in all, the results suggest that the 1988 Basel standards were effective in that, subsequent to their adoption, undercapitalized G-10 banks generally increased their capital but not their credit risk.
This paper analyses the effect of soliciting a rating on the rating outcome of banks. Using a sample of Asian banks rated by Fitch Ratings ("Fitch"), I find evidence that unsolicited ratings tend to be lower than solicited ones, after accounting for differences in observed bank characteristics. This downward bias does not seem to be explained by the fact that better-quality banks self-select into the solicited group. Rather, unsolicited ratings appear to be lower because they are based on public information. As a result, they tend to be more conservative than solicited ratings, which incorporate both public and non-public information.JEL-code : G15, G18, G21
The transition from natural to rational numbers is difficult for most elementary school children. A major cause for these difficulties is assumed to be the "conceptual change" they need to undergo in order to see that several natural number properties do not apply to rational numbers. To appropriately handle pupils' difficulties, teachers need well-developed content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). In the present study, a lesson series to promote pre-service teachers' (PSTs) rational number CK and PCK was developed according to design principles to foster conceptual change. This lesson series was evaluated based on a comparison of the CK and PCK growth of PSTs in the intervention group (n=138) with the knowledge growth of PSTs in an alternative teacher training course (control group; n=135). Intervention group PSTs significantly outperformed control group PSTs on CK and PCK, indicating that the intervention was effective in stimulating PSTs' knowledge on rational numbers. Methodological, theoretical as well as practical implications of the present study are discussed.
We address a number of comparative issues relating to the performance of failure prediction models for small, private firms. We use two models provided by vendors, a model developed by the National Bank of Belgium, and the Altman Z-score model to investigate model power, the extent of disagreement between models in the ranking of firms, and the design of internal rating systems. We also examine the potential gains from combining the output of multiple models. We find that the power of all four models in predicting bankruptcies is very good at the one-year horizon, even though not all of the models were developed using bankruptcy data and the models use different statistical methodologies. Disagreements in firm rankings are nevertheless significant across models, and model choice will have an impact on loan pricing and origination decisions. We find that it is possible to realize important gains from combining models with similar power. In addition, we show that it can also be beneficial to combine a weaker model with a stronger one if disagreements across models with respect to failing firms are high enough. Finally, the number of classes in an internal rating system appears to be more important than the distribution of borrowers across classes.
This paper analyses the effect of soliciting a rating on the rating outcome of banks. Using a sample of Asian banks rated by Fitch Ratings ("Fitch"), I find evidence that unsolicited ratings tend to be lower than solicited ones, after accounting for differences in observed bank characteristics. This downward bias does not seem to be explained by the fact that better-quality banks self-select into the solicited group. Rather, unsolicited ratings appear to be lower because they are based on public information. As a result, they tend to be more conservative than solicited ratings, which incorporate both public and non-public information.JEL-code : G15, G18, G21
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.