Macroprudential Policy: A Review

The aim of macroprudential policy is to ensure financial stability by avoiding the outbreak of banking crises, which have a dangerous effect on the economy. Is macroprudential policy effective in the face of banking crises and systemic risks? The macroprudential policy has received significant interest from policy-makers and researchers. A few developing countries were using macroprudential policy tools well before the 2008 financial crisis, but significant progress has been made thereafter in both emerging and industrialized economies to put in place specific institutional settings for macroprudential policy. The fundamental objective of macroprudential policy is to maintain the stability of the financial system by making it more resistant and preventing the risk build-up. The objective of this paper is to analyze the important role of macroprudential policy in ensuring overall financial stability. Since the financial crisis of 2008, macroprudential policy has been increasingly used across economies. These measures aim at smoothing financial cycles and thereby mitigating the impact on the real economy, thereby allowing monetary policy to focus on price stability and promote growth and full employment. Macroprudential policy instruments fall into two categories, depending on their purpose, namely, to prevent procyclicality or to enhance the resilience and soundness of the financial system against shocks. The first category of instruments is used to stop bubbles from forming and smooth cycles, i.e. to force the debt-equity of economic operators on an income basis to prevent unsustainable credit bubbles, or to require dynamic loss provisioning rules. The second category of macro-prudential policy is to improve the resilience to shocks, such as capital surcharges for systemic institutions or the requirement to hold liquid assets to cope with market panics, and to make the financial system less complex. Keywords: macroprudential policy, financial stability, tools and measures, systemic risks.

After the global financial crisis of 2007, macroprudential policy instruments have gained in recognition as a crucial tool for enhancing financial stability. Monetary policy, fiscal policy, and microprudential policy operate with a different toolkit and focus on achieving goals other than the stability of the financial system as a whole. In ligh of this, a fourth policy – namely macroprudential policy – is required to mitigate and prevent shocks that could destabilize the financial system as a whole and compromise financial stability. The aim of this paper is to contrast macroprudential policy with other economic policies and explain why other economic policies are unable to attain financial stability, which in turn justifies the need for a separate macroprudential policy, the ultimate goal whereof is precisely financial stability of the financial system as a whole. Our research results based on the descriptive research method indicate that, in order to prevent future financial crises, it is indispensable to combine both the microprudential and the macroprudential approach to financial stability. This is because the causes of the crises are often such that they cannot be prevented or mitigated by relying only on microprudential or only on macroprudential policy instruments.

In recent years, the importance of international capital flows has been increasing, which has significantly accelerated the integration process of the international financial system. After 2008, the central banks of major western developed economies implemented loose monetary policy, which led to a large amount of capital flowing into new market countries. However, international capital flowed out of new market countries after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in 2013 that the Federal Reserve would gradually withdraw from quantitative easing.The great fluctuation of international capital has aroused the debate about monetary policy and macro-prudential policy. Rey (2015) believes that under any exchange rate system, only the control of international capital flows can maintain the independence of monetary policy. In view of the above findings, since 2016, the People’s Bank of China has established a macro-prudential regulatory mechanism for international capital flows to resist external financial shocks.By introducing domestic and international financial institutions, this paper brings the macro-prudential policy of foreign financial shocks and capital flows into the DSGE framework of small countries’ open economy. Domestic financial institutions can raise funds by absorbing the deposits of their own residents and foreign residents; international financial institutions buy and sell the creditor’s rights issued by various countries, so as to implement capital flows.It is found that under the impact of foreign interest rate increase, on the one hand, it will tighten the balance sheet of domestic financial institutions, and reduce the scale of corporate credit through bank incentives and constraints; on the other hand, it will cause the devaluation of domestic currency and international capital outflows, and affect the stability of the financial system. The macro-prudential management mechanism of capital flows can enhance the ability to resist external financial shocks. For China, the proportion of foreign debt is relatively low, and the policy effect is relatively mediocre for the counter cyclical tax adjustment mechanism of external borrowing of domestic financial structure; however, the counter cyclical adjustment mechanism for the capital flow of international financial institutions can significantly improve social welfare.This paper gives the following policy recommendations: Firstly, we should increase the significance of external financial risk prevention. In recent years, the rapid growth of international capital flows has brought new challenges to new economies. Secondly, we should strengthen the supervision of cross-border capital flows to resist external financial risks. In the process of further opening up of China’s financial market, the People’s Bank of China should improve the macro-prudential supervision of foreign exchange market, real estate market and credit market to prevent systemic financial risks. Finally, we should properly solve the financing problems of enterprises. For China, capital outflows will aggravate the already severe credit market pressure. Therefore, on the one hand, resist the external financial risk contagion through the macro-prudential supervision mechanism of capital flows; on the other hand, maintain the liquidity at a reasonable level through the flexible operation of monetary policy, in order to support economic growth.

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The economics literature related to the financial system seeks to define the concepts of financial stability, systemic risk and macroprudential instruments for the purpose of drafting a policy that essentially "leans against the wind", that is, a policy that monitors macroeconomic vulnerabilities and combats system instability. Such a policy should cover all financial institutions involved in credit intermediation (not just banks) and consider the pro-cyclical and intrinsic nature of risk in the financial system, and account for the spillovers effects of policies in other countries, that is, the global context. This article summarizes the main concepts related to macroprudential policy discussed in the economics literature after the crisis the 2008 financial crisis. In addition, we describe macroprudential policy in the context of the Brazilian financial system, specifically major policies implemented in the banking regulatory environment related to Basel III and non-bank regulations related to shadow banks. After the 2008 crisis, Brazil was one of the precursors countries in operating macroprudential instruments to curb excessive credit growth and strong capital inflows. The Brazilian financial system has a broad regulatory perimeter, adhering to international standards and covering the Shadow banking system. This system has a weak connection with the banking system and is small relative to the financial assets of the national and global systems. </span></p></div></div></div>

Government interference in the social-economic processes through the implementation of anti-crisis measures and fiscal expansion holds the embodiment of financial risks for economic entities. As a result, government debt and budget gaps at the continuing drop of real disposable household income and companies’ profitability grow. Over a long-term horizon, the decisions made can cause a financial system misbalance and new risk generation, including systemic risks in the sphere of public finance. The author carries out the theoretical research of financial system risks, which can result in a decrease in the system stability in general. The study determines that there is no single theoretical concept of financial risks of the public sector. Within the research, the author analyzed the approaches to systemic risks in various economic sectors and decomposed systemic risk of the public finance sphere. The study specified global factors of influence on the financial system stability, determined the impact factors and common fiscal limitations considering the needs in the execution of state obligations. The pandemic factor – COVID-19 spread is highlighted as an exogenous factor of impact on the formation of financial system misbalances. The main threat to the financial system stability considered in terms of the functional-institutional approach is the deficiency of economic entities’ liquidity. Unprecedented budgetary measures of anti-crisis financial regulation, the deferred impact – tax preferences, and monetary measures had an immediate influence on the liquidity volume during the implementation of anti-COVID activities. Tools of budgetary monitoring, budget expenditures reviews, tax expenditures reviews, and budget consolidation ensure the budget mechanism flexibility. Factors producing financial system risks and the selected measures of state regulation will set the trends for the social-economic development of the country in the coming years.

Capital account liberalisation can give rise to uncertainty in capital flows, which may lead to an accumulation of financial risks. This study measures the systemic financial risk indices using the coefficient of variation method with data of 24 countries from 2003 to 2019 and the impact of capital account liberalisation on systemic financial risks using the panel threshold model. Evidence shows that systemic financial risk indices vary heterogeneously across countries. The systemic financial risk indices of high-income countries are lower than those of middle- and low-income countries. Second, capital account liberalisation has an asymmetric effect on systemic financial risk with a double threshold. Low-intensity and high-intensity capital account liberalisation increases systemic financial risk. However, medium-intensity capital account liberalisation is effective in reducing systemic financial risk. Third, the heterogeneity results suggest that capital account liberalisation is conducive to reducing the financial risk of high- and middle-income countries and has the opposite effect on low-income countries. Therefore, this study recommends that countries adjust the intensity of capital account liberalisation according to their national conditions. It is necessary to establish a regulatory system for cross-border capital flows and maximise the benefits of liberalisation while safeguarding financial market stability.

Financial systemic risk – defined as the risk of collapse of an entire financial system vis-a-vis any one individual financial institution – is making inroads into academic research in the aftermath of the late 2000s Global Financial Crisis. We shed light on this new concept by investigating the value of various systemic financial risk measures in the corporate failure predictions of listed nonfinancial firms. Our sample includes 225,813 firm-quarter observations covering 8,604 US firms from 2000 Q1 to 2016 Q4. We find that financial systemic risk is incrementally useful in forecasting corporate failure over and above the predictions of the traditional accounting-based and market-based factors. Our results are stronger when the firm in consideration has higher equity volatility relative to financial sector volatility, the smaller size relative to the market, and more debts in current liabilities. The combined evidence suggests that systemic risk is a useful supplementary source of information in capital markets.

The characteristics of the new dual-cycle development pattern and systemic financial risk based on TVP-SVAR and MS-VAR model analyses

Local government debt plays an important role in promoting economic development, but with the continuous expansion of the scale of local government debt, coupled with the opacity of financial and debt information, local debt risk may be directly transformed into financial risk. Therefore, the potential mechanism of local government debt risk inducing systemic financial risk is studied to strictly control local government debt and prevent it at present. It is of great practical significance to mitigate systemic financial risk. At present, the research on local government debt mainly focuses on the mechanism of local government debt to amplify economic fluctuations, while the potential mechanism of local government debt risk to induce systemic financial risk is relatively few. From the perspective of local government bonds and land finance, the innovation of this paper is to depict the Chinese elements such as the maturity of local government bonds, the opacity of debt and financial information, and to integrate local government debt, land finance and financial intermediaries into the framework of general equilibrium to analyze the potential mechanism of systemic financial risk induced by local debt risk. This study finds that when the economy is facing negative productivity shocks, the decline in total output will inhibit the land demand of households and enterprises, and the decline in land prices caused by the decline in demand will reduce the land-related fiscal revenue of local governments. On the one hand, the decline of land-related fiscal revenue will reduce government expenditure; on the other hand, it will increase the pressure on local governments to repay debt and the risk of debt, which will lead to the rise of bond interest rates and the decline of bond prices. Lower bond prices will affect the balance sheet of financial intermediaries, resulting in increased leverage and risk premium of financial intermediaries. Under the balance sheet constraints, financial intermediaries will shrink corporate credit, resulting in an increase in systemic financial risk. Rising interest rates and tightening credit will restrain enterprises’ investment and land demand, further reduce total output and land prices, increase the debt risk of local governments, and form a financial accelerator mechanism in the economy, which will lead to the mutual reinforcement of the debt risk and financial risk of local governments and form a vicious circle. In addition, when financial risk rises, the default risk of local government debt is lower. Based on the trade-off between risk and return, financial intermediaries will hold more local government bonds. Credit squeeze brought by asset allocation changes will further strengthen the financial accelerator mechanism and strengthen the interaction between debt risk and financial risk. Meanwhile, although extending the bond maturity can reduce the pressure of local governments to repay their debt in the short term, the longer the bond maturity is, the greater the financial shock and economic volatility caused by local government debt risk are. The paper indicates that: for resolving local government debt risk and reducing the probability of systemic risk, we firstly need to improve the local government bond market, diversify local government bond investors, and change the current situation dominated by commercial banks; secondly, we should strengthen budget constraints and control the scale of local government debt; thirdly, we should rationally design the maturity structure of local government bonds, strengthen the transparency of local government finance and debt information, and play the role of market constraints; finally, when financial risk rises, the central bank can adopt non-traditional monetary policy to intervene in the market, which can reduce financial risk and social welfare losses.

The financial crisis has generated fundamental reforms in the financial regulatory system in the U.S. and internationally. Much of this reform was in direct response to the weaknesses revealed in the precrisis system. The new ?macroprudential? approach to financial regulations focuses on risks arising in financial markets broadly, as well as the potential impact on the financial system that may arise from financial distress at systemically important financial institutions. Systemic risk is the key factor in financial stability, but our current understanding of systemic risk is rather limited. While the goal of using regulation to maintain financial stability is clear, it is not obvious how to design an effective regulatory framework that achieves the financial stability objective while also promoting financial innovations. This paper discusses academic research and expert opinions on this vital subject of financial stability and regulatory reforms. Specifically, among other issues, it discusses the impact of increasing public disclosure of supervisory information, the effectiveness of bank stress testing as a tool to enhance financial stability, whether the financial crisis was caused by too big to fail (TBTF), and whether the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (DFA) resolution regime would be effective in achieving financial stability and ending TBTF.

Macroprudential Policy: Case Study from a Tabletop Exercise

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to critique the suitability of macro prudential policy as a proactive and effective toolkit for mitigating financial system risk in developing economies.Design/methodology/approach: The author first discusses the causes of the 2007/2008 global financial crisis in developed and developing economies. The narration is to demonstrate that the causes, duration and amplitude of the crisis differ across jurisdictions, and any regulatory model that will be effective in mitigating future crises must take into cognizance the institutional peculiarities of those countries. Findings: The paper provides evidence on the difficulties of implementing the macro-prudential policy toolkits in developing economies because of their institutional and structural characteristics such as inflationary pressure, undiversified economy, lagging supervision, among others.Research Limitations/implication: There is paucity of substantial local literature on macro-prudential policy in developing economies, especially Africa. While this study is meant to close this gap, literature reviewed however, relied extensively on studies on developed economies. Practical implication: The extrapolation of prudential tools from developed economies requires serious caution by developing economies because of dissimilarities in economic structure, financial system, governance structure and causes of systemic risk, which may not be mitigated by macro-prudential toolkits.Originality and Value: The study adds value to the global discourse on regulatory models for mitigating systemic crisis by introducing the perspective of developing economies to the macro-prudential debate.

Monetary Policy, Macroprudential Policy, and Financial Stability

Financial systemic risk is an important issue in economics and financial systems. Trying to detect and respond to systemic risk with growing amounts of data produced in financial markets and systems, a lot of researchers have increasingly employed machine learning methods. Machine learning methods study the mechanisms of outbreak and contagion of systemic risk in the financial network and improve the current regulation of the financial market and industry. In this paper, we survey existing researches and methodologies on assessment and measurement of financial systemic risk combined with machine learning technologies, including big data analysis, network analysis and sentiment analysis, etc. In addition, we identify future challenges, and suggest further research topics. The main purpose of this paper is to introduce current researches on financial systemic risk with machine learning methods and to propose directions for future work.

Financial stability is a crucial indicator of the financial sector's health, reflecting the system's resilience or vulnerability to crises. This study investigates the impact of macroeconomic variables and financial inclusion on financial stability in Indonesia, utilizing quarterly data from the first quarter of 2012 to the fourth quarter of 2021. Employing the Vector Error Correction Model (VECM), the research examines the influences of these factors in both the short and long term. The findings reveal that macroeconomic variables and financial inclusion significantly affect financial stability in Indonesia across both time frames. Specifically, inflation emerges as a critical factor influencing financial stability in the long term, while interest rates play a pivotal role in the short term. Moreover, financial inclusion, represented by the public's use of banking products and third-party funds relative to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), impacts financial stability both in the long and short term. Conversely, financial inclusion, measured by credit to GDP, exhibits only short-term effects on financial stability. The results underscore the importance of careful consideration by the central bank when formulating monetary policy, particularly regarding interest rate adjustments, due to their immediate impact on financial system stability. Over the long term, maintaining control over inflation rates is imperative to safeguard financial stability. Furthermore, financial institutions, in their role of fostering financial inclusion by distributing credit, must balance the quality of credit with its quantity to avoid negative impacts on the financial system's stability. This study contributes valuable insights for policymakers and financial institutions aiming to bolster Indonesia's financial stability through prudent macroeconomic management and the strategic implementation of financial inclusion initiatives.