Their reactions provide economic incentives for banks to strengthen their management of risk and hold at least adequate levels of capital against their risks. One might say that Basel II seeks an “efficient frontier” of policy objectives through the three pillars. Each pillar provides something that the other two cannot. Each is essential to achieving our overall objective of financial stability. I realise that this analogy of the three pillars as a portfolio of policy options is an oversimplification. But it helps us to visualise why we think that the most “efficient frontier” involves a mixture of minimum rules, tempered by supervisory discretion, and supplemented by market-based incentives. IV. Consistency of accounting standards and a three-pillar system  Of course, our three-pillar supervisory system is highly dependent on a firm’s internal measures of risk exposures. “Basel II,” for example, looks at a bank’s own measures of risk in Pillar 1. Supervisors then engage bank managers in a dialogue on their interpretations of those measures - and the steps managers take in response - in Pillar 2. Finally, Pillar 3 is intended to give the market greater insight into those measures of risk exposures and what the bank may do to control them. Because the three pillars are so dependent on the internal measures, neither supervisors nor bankers can ignore the mechanics that define how financial data are recorded and reported. Those mechanics, as you know, are governed by national accounting standards, which is the last topic I would like to address.

Integration of the risk management function  One of the most notable advances in risk management across all three financial services sectors is the growing emphasis on developing a firm-wide assessment of risk. This constitutes the first trend in the Joint Forum’s report. Improvements in technology and telecommunications have made it easier for firms to gather, collect, and analyse large amounts of data on their exposures and business activities efficiently and increasingly in near “real time.” To make the best use of firm-wide data, some organisations have established a dedicated risk management function to foster more highly integrated and systematic approaches to risk measurement and management. The risk management function typically promotes the use of common risk measures across business lines. It can then report the firm-wide risk data to senior management. Reports may range from daily updates on “value-at-risk” trading positions to regular, if less frequent, compilations of the results of stress testing. The broader use of shared definitions to guide the comprehensive reporting of risk across the firm enables the integrated risk management function to identify concentrations of risk. Concentrations matter particularly when various business lines within the firm have different kinds of exposures to the same counterparty. Comprehensive and consistent reporting helps, moreover, to ensure that the firm is aware of the wide range of risks to which it is exposed; that it understands the relative importance of various risks and how they may interact; and that the firm is less likely to ignore material sources of risk.