Play a word association game with Basel II and most bankers will return with Capital Adequacy. On the plus side Basel II signalled a move away from a purely static regulator driven capital adequacy measure (Basel I) to an internal and relatively invasive assessment of the capital profile of a bank, called the Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP). On the down side, its implementation across many markets has been flawed due to a focus on Capital Adequacy and issues with review and approval of internal models. But there is more to the debate around Basel II and Basel III than just Capital Adequacy and ICAAP.
Under ICAAP requirements a bank needs to have in place internal procedures and processes to ensure that it possesses adequate capital resources in the long term to cover all of its material risks and the board is kept cognizant of any expected or projected capital shortfall.
Basel III introduces significant reforms to the Basel II networks primarily by setting out the supervisory framework for liquidity risk measurement via two minimum funding liquidity standards.
To understand the current capital adequacy requirement framework we begin with an overview of the historical back ground behind the development of Basel II and take a quick look at Risk, ALM and Bank regulation failure :
The following courses then address Pillar 2 of the Basel II framework- the Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP):
Basel III is due to be fully implemented by 2019 and represents reforms to and strengthening of the existing capital requirement and liquidity standards. The following courses in turn review the revisions to the Basel II framework that Basel III encompasses as well as a detailed review of the liquidity reforms.
Other courses related to Basel II, ICAAP and Basel III are: