WHY (RE)INSURANCE IS NOT SYSTEMIC

被引:32
作者
Kessler, Denis
机构
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1539-6975.2013.12007.x
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
The traditional model of (re) insurance lacks the elements that make a financial institution systemically important: risks are effectively pulverized; liabilities tend to be prefunded, which eliminates most of the leverage in the traditional sense; and active asset-liability management reduces most of the liquidity mismatch that traditionally propagates systemic risk. (Re) insurers that have stuck to this traditional business model have successfully weathered the crisis, even playing a stabilizing role. Unfortunately, this is not sufficiently recognized in the current IAIS/FSB1 debate on assessing systemic risk in the (re) insurance sector.
引用
收藏
页码:477 / 487
页数:11
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
Bain A D., 1999, The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, V24, P228
[2]  
Douglas W.D., 2000, Q REV, P14
[3]  
European Commission, 2007, INS GUAR SCHEM EU CO
[4]  
European Insurance and Occupational Pension Authority, 2011, EIOPATFQIS511001
[5]  
Financial Stability Board The Basel Commitee, 2011, ASS MACR IMP HIGH LO
[6]  
Guy Carpenter, 2012, GUY CARP JAN 2012 RE
[7]   The Financial Crisis, Systemic Risk, and the Future of Insurance Regulation [J].
Harrington, Scott E. .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND INSURANCE, 2009, 76 (04) :785-819
[8]  
International Association of Insurance Supervisors, 2012, GLOB SYST IMP INS PR
[9]  
International Association of Insurance Supervisors, 2012, REINS FIN STAB
[10]  
Re Swiss, 2003, SIGMA