穩(wěn)妥實施國際金融監(jiān)管新標準，提升我國金融體系穩(wěn)健性。實施新的國際標準是進一步提升我國在國際金融監(jiān)管改革中發(fā)言權的基礎，但新監(jiān)管標準在國內落地實施，必須充分考慮我國經(jīng)濟發(fā)展進入新常態(tài)的新特征以及我國金融業(yè)的結構性特點，秉持“實質重于形式”的原則，兼顧統(tǒng)一性與靈活性。穩(wěn)妥實施國際金融監(jiān)管新標準，關鍵在于實施具有差異化的分類監(jiān)管。差異化的分類監(jiān)管可以有幾個依據(jù)：一是金融機構的系統(tǒng)重要性及國際活躍程度。對于廣泛參與國際業(yè)務的大型國際化金融機構應按照國際標準實施高水平、更密集的監(jiān)管，這一方面有助于降低大型金融機構進入國際市場的門檻，另一方面能增強其應對業(yè)務復雜性潛在風險的能力；而對于業(yè)務集中于國內、主要從事傳統(tǒng)業(yè)務的中小金融機構，則適宜采用簡單、有效的監(jiān)管規(guī)則，降低金融機構的合規(guī)成本。二是金融機構的風險管控能力與自我約束能力。對于已經(jīng)建立了較為完善的公司治理機制、風險管理能力強的金融機構，可以減少監(jiān)管干預或限制；而對于風險偏好激進、內部風險評估和管理較弱的金融機構，應加強監(jiān)督檢查甚至提高監(jiān)管要求，限制其非理性擴張。三是實體經(jīng)濟的薄弱環(huán)節(jié)。對于小微企業(yè)、產(chǎn)業(yè)升級等需要政策扶持的經(jīng)濟領域相關業(yè)務，金融監(jiān)管應在規(guī)范風險管理的基礎上，在制度上給予支持。而對于產(chǎn)能過剩的行業(yè)，或者運作鏈條長、結構復雜的業(yè)務，應采取更加審慎的監(jiān)管態(tài)度，通過強化監(jiān)管要求，抑制那些為追逐短期回報而脫離實體經(jīng)濟需求的自我金融創(chuàng)新、自我循環(huán)和自我膨脹行為。
不斷完善金融監(jiān)管體制，增強金融監(jiān)管有效性。金融發(fā)展史表明，金融監(jiān)管的有效性不取決于“誰來監(jiān)管”，而取決于“如何監(jiān)管”。單純的監(jiān)管組織機構改變并不能代替深層次的改革。監(jiān)管理念、監(jiān)管制度、監(jiān)管技術和監(jiān)管模式的變革才是深層次的根本性改革。歐美國家金融監(jiān)管權力重新配置的最終效果還有待于檢驗。在金融監(jiān)管體制改革的問題上，核心是監(jiān)管模式與金融業(yè)發(fā)展狀況相匹配。本次金融危機打破了金融業(yè)混業(yè)經(jīng)營的大趨勢，暴露了綜合經(jīng)營的各種弊端?；鞓I(yè)經(jīng)營導致各類金融之間的風險相互滲透，擴大了系統(tǒng)性風險，增加了監(jiān)管的難度，可能并非金融業(yè)發(fā)展的最優(yōu)模式。現(xiàn)階段“一行三會”分業(yè)監(jiān)管模式總體上符合我國國情，有利于金融監(jiān)管專業(yè)化，有利于防止不同政策目標的沖突。根據(jù)目前國內金融市場發(fā)育水平，應在分業(yè)監(jiān)管的基礎上，加強不同監(jiān)管部門之間的協(xié)調，比較合理的模式是在國務院層面建立金融監(jiān)管協(xié)調機制，填補監(jiān)管真空，防止監(jiān)管套利；不同政府部門之間建立信息分享機制，及早識別系統(tǒng)性風險，加強宏觀審慎監(jiān)管，保證監(jiān)管政策、財政政策、貨幣政策和產(chǎn)業(yè)政策之間的協(xié)調配合，防范區(qū)域性和系統(tǒng)性金融風險。
參考文獻
王兆星，2014，《后危機時代國際金融改革探索》，北京：中國金融出版社。
王勝邦，2013，《國際金融危機與國際金融監(jiān)管改革》，北京：中國金融出版社。
Haldane, Andrew G, 2014, Managing global finance as a system, Speech at the Maxwell Fry Annual Global Finance Lecture, at Birmingham University, 29 October;Rosenau, James N, 1992, Governance without Government, Cambridge University Press.
New Changes in the Global Financial Regulation in the Post-Crisis Era
Wang Shengbang Yu Liang
Abstract: The financial crisis is an extreme form of the financial system's vulnerability, and all previous financial crises have helped to promote the reform of the financial regulation system and relevant technological progress. Since the global financial crisis in 2008, the global financial regulatory framework has undergone a few significant changes: first, G20 steers the global financial regulatory reform; second, FSB becomes an important coordination platform for the global financial regulatory reform; and third, the position of BCBS in the global financial regulatory agencies has been greatly improved. There have also appeared some new trends concerning the concept, mode and mechanism of financial regulation, including the changes in the financial supervision ideas, the widespread attention paid to the "life and death" of financial institutions, the significantly tightened financial regulation, and the power reorganization concerning financial regulation. With the improved internationalization of Chinese banks, China also faces higher external pressure and has stronger internal motivation for participating in global financial governance and regulatory reform, which requires us to have a profound understanding of the difficulties and complexity of the international financial system and develop a clear strategy, so as to gain new opportunities in the future global competition.
Keywords: post-crisis era, financial crisis, financial regulation, the Financial Stability Board (FSB), financial system reform
王勝邦，中國銀監(jiān)會審慎規(guī)制局副局長，巴塞爾銀行監(jiān)管委員會政策制定工作組成員。研究方向為國際金融監(jiān)管改革。主要著作有《商業(yè)銀行資本約束與信貸擴張》《新資本協(xié)議：信用風險建模、計量和驗證》《全球金融危機與金融監(jiān)管改革》等。俞靚，中國銀監(jiān)會審慎規(guī)制局研究員，巴塞爾委員會風險計量工作組成員。
