| Reference : Comment expliquer les reforms du secteur financier en Europe : acteurs, idées ou inst... |
| Parts of books : Contribution to collective works | |||
| Law, criminology & political science : Political science, public administration & international relations | |||
| Finance | |||
| http://hdl.handle.net/10993/46322 | |||
| Comment expliquer les reforms du secteur financier en Europe : acteurs, idées ou institutions | |
| French | |
| [en] How can we explain European financial sector reforms: actors, ideas or institutions? | |
Howarth, David  [University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE) > Department of Social Sciences (DSOC) >] | |
| Feb-2021 | |
| Les Politiques Publiques dans la Crise | |
| [en] Public Policy during the Crisis | |
| Saurugger, Sabine | |
| Hassenteufel, Patrick | |
| Presses de Sciences Po | |
| 111-144 | |
| Yes | |
| 9782724627008 | |
| Paris | |
| France | |
| [en] Financial Regulation ; Financial sector ; Europe ; Banking ; Public Policy | |
| [en] This chapter presents an analysis of the public policies carried out in Europe to regulate the financial sector over the pas fifteen years, focusing notably on the role of financial sector and government actors, while considering the role of ideas and institutional frameworks. The concern for financial sector stabilization and reinforced supervision in the aftermath of the crisis has led to the adoption of various European-level and national regulations. Competitive pressures within a highly internationalized sector, as well as the many possibilities for regulatory arbitrage, have justified the use of international and, at least, EU-level financial sector control mechanisms. This chapter demonstrates that the crises from which the EU suffered from 2007 led to a rupture in policies and power relations between public and private actors. The strengthening of supervision and supranational supervision is the direct consequence, and resulted in the creation of the three European authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA), and above all the creation of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and the transfer of supervisory powers over the euro zone's largest banks to the European Central Bank. The possibility of inadequate national supervision — a situation in which national public authorities ignore or accept the problems of national banks for various reasons — has thus been reduced. The effect of Basel III (international capital guidelines) is also felt on the activities and organization of large banks, encouraged to limit their high-risk activities. Most of the major European banks have reduced, or are in the process of reducing, their balance sheets. Yet to speak of a paradigm shift in the approach of the governments of major European countries, or even the European Commission, to financial regulation is premature. The constraints imposed on the financial sector, apart from the banks, have only partially increased. As a result of the Banking Union, the overall influence of banks has probably diminished at the national level, at least with regard to banking supervision. However, the ongoing weakness of bank regulation in many areas — for example, the weakness or absence of bank structural reform in all European countries with the exception of the United Kingdom — demonstrates ongoing bank influence. Moreover, other financial sector actors continue to be under-regulated and, arguably, insufficiently supervised. | |
| http://hdl.handle.net/10993/46322 | |
| http://www.pressesdesciencespo.fr/fr/book/?gcoi=27246100509060#h2tabFormats |
There is no file associated with this reference.
All documents in ORBilu are protected by a user license.
