Panel 2: International Cooperation and Financial Stability

Panel 2: International Cooperation and Financial Stability

by Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE · View the channel on PSI

Humanities, Social Sciences & Thought Economics & Finance KCLInternational economicsKCLTInternational trade and commerce
🎙 Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE 👥 441 📅 September 23, 2026 ⏱ 97 min 👁 4 📄 expert opinion 🧭 2026-09-23
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

regulatory easingbank supervisionresolution planningBasel IIInon-bank lending

Summary

This panel discussion, held at the Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, addresses the impact of deregulation and ‘regulatory easing’ on international cooperation and financial stability. Amit Seru opens by describing the US context: banks have lost market share to non-banks and private credit, fueling arguments for easing capital and supervision. However, he cautions that capital and supervision are complements, not substitutes, and that unilateral easing, especially by the US, creates risks of migration of credit risk to less observed sectors and undermines coordination. Karen Braun-Munzinger, from the Single Resolution Board, argues that simplification can reduce burden without easing standards, focusing on efficiency in resolution planning and the three pillars of resolution: resources, operational tools, and international cooperation. Patrick Amis, ECB, notes the cyclical nature of deregulation debates and distinguishes between proportionality, risk tolerance, and fragmentation, stressing that resilience and competitiveness must be pursued together. Gaston Gelos from BIS is mentioned as a discussant, though his direct remarks are not in the provided transcript. The panel discusses the need for integration and banking union completeness to reduce fragmentation, and the Q&A session touches on the role of central banks and the false sense of resilience. The overall message is that while simplification is desirable, it must not compromise financial stability, and international coordination is essential to avoid a race to the bottom.

222 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The value of this panel lies in its systematic examination of the ‘regulatory easing’ debate from multiple institutional perspectives. Amit Seru provides a rigorous argument that capital and supervision are complements, using evidence from the decline of bank lending share and the evolution of non-bank finance. He challenges the ‘false sense of resilience’ created by central bank backstops, invoking the Lucas critique. Karen Braun-Munzinger offers a nuanced view that simplification can be achieved without lowering standards, emphasizing the three pillars of resolution. Patrick Amis brings a historical perspective, observing that deregulation peaks are often followed by crises. The argumentation is solid, with speakers grounding their positions in professional experience and institutional mandates, though it remains at the level of expert opinion rather than formal empirical analysis. The discussion effectively underscores the tension between national competitiveness and collective financial stability, making a compelling case for international cooperation.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The panel demonstrates high scientific rigor through the credibility of its speakers: a Stanford professor, a board member of the SRB, an ECB director, and a BIS official. While no explicit external sources are cited, the panellists reference their own research and institutional experiences, lending authority to the discussion. The title is appropriate and directly mirrors the content, which consistently revolves around international cooperation and financial stability in the face of deregulatory pressures. The Q&A segment further grounds the discussion in practical concerns. Overall, the content is well-aligned with the stated topic, and the lack of formal citations is compensated by the expertise of the participants.

267 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content: the panel focuses on international cooperation and financial stability in the context of regulatory easing pressures.

Quality & Reliability

8/10

Panel composed of senior academics and regulators with direct expertise in banking supervision, resolution, and financial stability. The discussion is reasoned and well-grounded, but it is an exchange of expert opinions rather than an empirical study.

Chapters

Contribution & Novelties

The panel provides a contemporary synthesis of the regulatory easing debate, integrating US and European perspectives and highlighting the complementarity of capital and supervision. Its original contribution lies in framing the issue as a coordination challenge: unilateral easing by a major jurisdiction (the US) makes international cooperation more difficult, potentially leading to risk migration. The discussion offers a clear typology of resolution needs and proposes simplification without lowering resilience standards.

Pour aller plus loin :

  • Basel III — International regulatory framework for banks, directly relevant to the capital and liquidity discussions.
  • Single Resolution Mechanism — EU framework for bank resolution, central to Karen Braun-Munzinger’s remarks.
  • Bank for International Settlements — Key institution for international financial cooperation and standard setting, referenced implicitly via Gaston Gelos.

124 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows balanced scores across information quantity, quality, technical depth, and reliability, reflecting a well-rounded expert discussion. The high reliability score is consistent with the panel's institutional credibility, while the technical level indicates a specialised audience.

Reliability 8/10