2012年-FSB全球金融稳定委员会_Handbook_for_FSB_Peer_Reviews_previous_version_14页_88kb

FSB Peer Reviews Handbook Summary

Core Content

The FSB Peer Reviews Handbook outlines the procedures and principles for conducting peer reviews within the Financial Stability Board (FSB) framework. These peer reviews are designed to enhance financial stability by evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of international financial standards and policies. The process is structured into five distinct stages: preparation, consultation, evaluation, approval, and follow-up.

Main Objectives

FSB peer reviews have four main objectives:

• Exchange of information: Share insights on regulatory, supervisory, and other financial sector policies and receive peer feedback.
• Evaluate adherence: Assess compliance with FSB Charter commitments, including financial stability, transparency, and international standards.
• Promote a 'race to the top': Encourage jurisdictions to adopt and implement effective policies.
• Assess effectiveness: Evaluate whether international standards and FSB policies have achieved their intended outcomes.

These objectives are guided by several key principles:

• Widely accepted standards: Focus on international standards, though may also address areas without existing standards.
• Complementarity: Avoid duplication of other international assessment mechanisms.
• Transparency: Results and assessments will be published.
• Engagement: Active and timely interaction with jurisdictions under review.
• Timely follow-up: Ensure ongoing monitoring and reassessment.
• Proportionality: Recommend actions that reflect the materiality of the concern for financial stability.

Types of Peer Reviews

There are two types of FSB peer reviews:

• Thematic reviews: Focus on the implementation and effectiveness of international financial standards and policies across the FSB membership in specific areas important for global financial stability.
• Country reviews: Assess the implementation of financial sector policies in a specific FSB member jurisdiction, particularly those related to FSAP and ROSC recommendations.

Prioritisation

The Standing Committee on Standards Implementation (SCSI) is responsible for prioritising countries and themes for peer reviews. Prioritisation is based on:

• Areas where international standards or policies have been developed to address global financial vulnerabilities.
• Topics where no international standards exist but are important for financial stability.
• Coordination with other FSB committees, international organisations, and SSBs to avoid duplication and enhance effectiveness.

Country reviews are typically scheduled 2–3 years after an FSAP or ROSC is completed. The selection of topics for country reviews is coordinated with the IMF and World Bank to avoid overlap with their work.

Preparation

The preparation stage includes:

• Topic selection (only for country reviews), which focuses on priority FSAP/ROSC recommendations and timely national reforms.
• Terms of Reference (TOR): Define the objectives, scope, methodology, and timeline of the review. The SCSI approves the TOR.
• Team selection: A small team of experts from FSB members, including both national authorities and international bodies, is formed. The team leader is selected from the FSB Plenary or equivalent.
• Information collection: Primarily through questionnaires, which are completed by jurisdictions within two months. Additional data, such as laws, regulations, and self-assessments, may also be requested.

Consultation

The consultation stage involves:

• Dialogue with authorities: The review team discusses findings and clarifies issues with the reviewed jurisdiction.
• Drafting of preliminary reports: The Secretariat leads the drafting process, incorporating input from the team. Reports are structured with an executive summary, analysis of progress and weaknesses, and recommendations.

Evaluation and Follow-up

• Peer review: The team evaluates the collected information and prepares the draft report.
• Approval: The draft report is submitted to the SCSI for approval.
• Publication: Results are published to ensure transparency.
• Follow-up: Jurisdictions are required to monitor and report on agreed implementation actions. Insights and lessons learned are shared to improve future practices.

Key Information

• Thematic reviews typically involve 7–8 team members and require more detailed questionnaires. They may last 9–12 months and require a time commitment of 6–8 weeks.
• Country reviews usually involve 4 team members and a standardised questionnaire. They may last 6–9 months with a time commitment of 5–6 weeks.
• Confidentiality: Access to confidential information is restricted to team members and designated Secretariat staff, with appropriate agreements in place.
• Consultation with private sector and stakeholders: May be conducted during thematic reviews to gather additional perspectives.
• Report structure: Country reports are around 15 pages, while thematic reports are up to 25 pages, with detailed information provided in annexes.

Conclusion

The FSB peer review process is designed to be flexible, transparent, and collaborative, ensuring that it adds value to the global financial stability agenda without duplicating existing mechanisms. It fosters learning, improves policy implementation, and encourages a 'race to the top' among FSB member jurisdictions.