|
|
Since the global financial crisis, supervisory authorities have increasingly focused their attention on how early supervisory intervention can promote financial stability by reducing the probability and impact of a bank failure. There is also a common recognition that for supervision to operate effectively, identification and intervention at an early stage are critical to prevent problems from escalating or becoming acute.
There have been important developments in supervisory practices in this regard since the crisis. National supervisory authorities have adopted more forward-looking approaches, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative elements into their risk-based supervisory assessments. In addition to institution-specific supervision, supervisors are also adopting benchmarking exercises and thematic reviews as part of their toolkit to better detect emerging risks and potential outlier banks. Many national authorities have also undergone organisational changes to support these approaches, and have introduced dedicated teams and oversight functions to ensure early supervisory actions are taken and followed up.
Based on practices observed, this study finds that early supervisory actions taken by supervisors depend not only on the expert judgment of supervisors but also to a large extent on an organisational infrastructure that sets in place: