英语翻译In spite of such wide popularity and wide adaptation,the Basel I Accordwas criticized by bankers,scholars and policymakers all over the world.First was its failure to make adequate allowance for the degree of reduction in risk exposure ac

英语翻译In spite of such wide popularity and wide adaptation,the Basel I Accordwas criticized by bankers,scholars and policymakers all over the world.First was its failure to make adequate allowance for the degree of reduction in risk exposure ac
英语翻译
In spite of such wide popularity and wide adaptation,the Basel I Accord
was
criticized by bankers,scholars and policymakers all over the world.First was its
failure to make adequate allowance for the degree of reduction in risk exposure
achievable through diversification?Second was the possibility that it would lead
banks to restrict their lending,which would lead to pro-cyclicality of bank lending;
and third,was its arbitrary and undiscriminating calibration of certain credit risks.
Several issues of special interest to developing countries emerged in the aftermath of
the East Asian Financial Crisis,which include:first,the effectiveness of capital
regulations in contributing to financial stability in developing countries; and second,
the impact of such an accord on short-term inter-bank lending,which was one of the
major factors causing the crisis to begin with
.
Fifteen years after the adoption of the Basel I Accord and amidst the new regulations
that are being currently made in both developed and developing countries around the
world,empirical research is far from able to answer the following questions:What is
the net outcome of such regulations on banks’ behavior towards credit risk?Can
such regulations help raise capital in banks that fall short of the minimum
requirement?What were the banks’ responses to such rules,i.e.did they increase the
level of their capital,forego risky projects or sell off assets?Did the guidelines
modify the credit risk of their portfolio and if yes,to which risk categories did they
reallocate their assets?How can the impact of these rules vary with the level of
economic development of different countries?Many other important questions
remain to be answered.
In addition to the unanswered questions as mentioned above,most of the studies on
the subject to date were conducted on the U.S.banking sector and other developed
countries.Studies analyzing the impact of the implementation of Basel-like
regulations and guidelines in the emerging and developed countries within the
framework of cross-sectional analysis remain surprisingly limited
.Moreover,under
Basel II new regulations and some changes to the existing regulations were made in
1996.Signatories to the new Accord were expected to implement the provisions by
2006,but various reviews and changes have postponed the starting date to 2008 at
the earliest.It is absolutely essential that policy makers of the developed countries as
well as their development partners (foreign governments,IMF,the World Bank etc.)
understand the special needs of the host countries in order to enable the latter to reap
the benefit of such regulations.
能翻译多少都行,差不多通顺就行,不用很专业,
为什么会变成这样,我明明放在文档里还好的呀
In spite of such wide popularity and wide adaptation,the Basel I Accord was criticized by bankers,scholars and policymakers all over the world.First was its failure to make adequate allowance for the degree of reduction in risk exposure achievable through diversification?Second was the possibility that it would lead banks to restrict their lending,which would lead to pro-cyclicality of bank lending; and third,was its arbitrary and undiscriminating calibration of certain credit risks.
Several issues of special interest to developing countries emerged in the aftermath of the East Asian Financial Crisis,which include:first,the effectiveness of capital
regulations in contributing to financial stability in developing countries; and second,the impact of such an accord on short-term inter-bank lending,which was one of the major factors causing the crisis to begin with.
.

英语翻译In spite of such wide popularity and wide adaptation,the Basel I Accordwas criticized by bankers,scholars and policymakers all over the world.First was its failure to make adequate allowance for the degree of reduction in risk exposure ac
在这样广泛的知名度和广泛的适应性,巴塞尔协议,尽管我
　　是
　　批评银行家,学者和世界各地的决策者.首先是其
　　未能弥补减少的风险暴露程度充足的补贴
　　通过多样化的实现?二是有可能,它会导致
　　银行的贷款限制,这将导致亲周期性的银行贷款;
　　第三,是它的任意和无歧视某些信贷风险的校准.
　　特别关心的几个问题向发展中国家出现的后果
　　东亚金融危机,包括：第一,资本的有效性
　　在促进发展中国家的金融稳定法规;第二,
　　对短期银行间贷款的影响这样一个协议,它是一个
　　造成危机的主要因素首先
　　.
　　后的巴塞尔协议通过我十五岁,在喜迎新规定
　　正在目前在发达国家和发展中国家围绕
　　世界上,实证研究还远远没有能够回答以下问题：什么是
　　这样的规定净结果对银行对信贷风险的行为呢?可以
　　这样规定有助于提高银行的资金短缺下降的最低
　　要求?什么是银行的反应,这些规则,即他们是否增加
　　他们的资本水平,放弃或变卖资产风险的项目?难道指引
　　修改其投资组合信用风险,如果是的,没有他们的风险类别
　　重新分配他们的资产?如何才能使这些规则的影响与变化的水平
　　不同国家的经济发展?其他许多重要的问题
　　有待回答.
　　除了上面提到的悬而未决的问题,大部分的研究
　　迄今为止主题,进行了美国银行业和其他发达国家
　　国家.研究分析了实施的巴塞尔影响,如
　　法规及新兴国家和发达国家在指导方针
　　横断面分析框架仍然令人惊讶有限
　　.此外,根据
　　巴塞尔协议和一些新的规定对现行法规的修改提出了在
　　1996.新协议签署,预计实施的规定确定
　　2006年,但各种评论和变化的开始日期推迟至2008年在
　　最早.这是绝对至关重要的是,发达国家政策制定者
　　以及它们的发展伙伴（外国政府,国际货币基金组织,世界银行等）
　　了解东道国的特殊需要,以便使后者获得
　　这样的规定受益.