Abstract
This paper assesses whether Basel III was necessary and would be able to bring about prudent risk behaviour among banks. Basel III aimed at setting new global standards to address both firm specific and general systemic risks by raising the quality of capital to position banks to better absorb losses on going concern basis, monitor leverage and also improve banks liquidity. However, it did not fully address many of the factors that were responsible for the global financial crisis and the fundamental problems identified with Basel I and Basel II. The risk weighting system suffers from the assumption of portfolio invariance and has not been refined. Basel III did not address the over reliance on external rating agencies in the capital framework and also the ethical issues such as corporate governance, account manipulation and full disclosures. The issue of reliance on market disclosure to aid the market in the assessment of quality of capital across institutions has also not been resolved.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
