Come full circle in this case by returning to the origin of the crisis . Banks have been at the heart of the financial turmoil. In autumn 2008, it was a close call for the world falls into a panic and a widespread systemic crisis. The banks then had to implement emergency measures in many countries and coordinating role of central banks to avert disaster.
We’re back in this section on the causes of this crisis, which hit unevenly institutions and banking systems in different countries, highlighting two “good students” Canada and France .
The state and the central bank intervened to save the banks: return on the arrangements put in place (recapitalization, guarantees, loans) and counterparties requested.
Finally, keep in mind the prospective dimension, we will ask the question of the future of banking . What conclusions can be drawn from the crisis that we are not yet out? The bank (and more generally financial) will change? What banking model adopted? Are there good and bad credit? Securitization is it still relevant?
The causes of the crisis
The banks were are at the heart of the turmoil of the crisis. In autumn 2008, he was a close call for the world falls into a panic and a widespread banking crisis. He then had to implement emergency measures in many countries and coordinating role of central banks to avert disaster. It is therefore not surprising that often attributed to the lead banks in the causes of the crisis. However, things are more complex.
Some responsibility
While banks are undoubtedly responsible in causing the crisis and that responsibility is more general than the errors made by a particular institution. But the differences in bank behavior are considerable from one country to another, particularly between the United States, the United Kingdom on one side, and the countries of the euro area on the other. And banks are not solely responsible, far from it. They have been a component of policy to support growth through credit developed from the 1990s.
We can criticize the actions of banks on three main points:
- Banks have poorly analyzed, poorly priced risk and the creditworthiness of borrowers. In Anglo-Saxon financial institutions, which were not always of the status of banks have lent on the basis of the value of goods bought on credit, unlike the French practice, which is to study mainly incomes of candidates for accession. All is well when the housing market is trending up. But down, the system collapses.
- The banks have financed the activities overly risky for their own account or for some of their customers and some institutions have ventured on trades and investments they can not control.
- The strong growth in lending by banks, including Anglo-Saxon, was possible only by increasing their own debt that has weakened and the release of their balance sheet part of the funds distributed by a securitization mass, in which banks, ratings agencies and investors were less fussy about risk analysis.