1) to disintermediation of the banking industry.
Bart P.M. Joosen is trained as civil law lawyer at Tilburg University, the Netherlands. He obtained his (equivalent to) LL.M degree in 1987. After completion of his academic study he was appointed as lecturer in the law faculty of Tilburg University in 1987 and he lectured company law and the law of groups of companies in the period 1987-1990. Concurrently he worked on a comparative law study on the Dutch and French legislation for bankruptcy of companies and was admitted in 1988 and 1989 as a fellow researcher to the Université de Paris I (Panthéon-Sorbonne). He successfully defended his dissertation on “Transfer of undertakings in bankruptcy” at Tilburg University and was promoted to doctor in law science (PhD) in 1998. After his time at University he first worked as in-house legal counsel at Philips Electronics in Eindhoven until 1992 after which he became active in private practice in Amsterdam. He works particularly for financial market clients. His main areas of expertise are in the field of financial services supervision with a focus on micro-prudential supervision of banks and insurers (including in-depth Basel II/Basel III and Solvency II knowledge). His more recent work concerns the assessment of topics concerning systemic risk and systemically important institutions. He also works for investment firms and businesses active in payments, clearing and settlement services and infrastructures. Besides working in private practice, Bart Joosen is a full professor Prudential Supervision Law at the University of Amsterdam and associated with the Centre of Financial Law of the Faculty of Law.
Journal of Financial Intermediation 9.
While some of the data I cite are U.S.-based, the trends of financial innovation and strong liquidity are also apparent in many other advanced economies.
Tobin (19//) also highlights the advantages of using financial
intermediation than individuals from four aspects: (1) convenience of
denomination, (2) risk pooling, reduction and allocation.
Journal of Financial Intermediation
understanding of those roles can be found in many models, such as
partial models, which are the portfolio structure models, and complete
models that include monopoly models, risk aversion models and real
resource models that are known as the theory of banking firm
(Baltensperger, 1980) and also the theory of intermediation.
The role of financial markets for economic growth
Innovations in financial products and practices, combined with strong liquidity, have accelerated the trend toward more complete markets. These changes have altered the roles of traditional financial intermediaries. In so doing, the products and practices of financial intermediation have, in my view, forever changed. As for the financial intermediaries themselves, they will continue to evolve with changing economic and financial risks. Indeed perhaps some may retreat to the practices of an earlier era if liquidity falters. In this case, markets may, for a time, become less complete. However, I believe that the advances of intellectual capital and the culture of capitalism will likely continue to increase the ability of markets to transfer risk even as liquidity fluctuates.
the apparent rise in global financial intermediation.
theory of intermediation, the question that why ultimate savers,
lenders, creditors prefer the liabilities of financial intermediation
to direct deal are examined by most economists.
Effect of Banking Regulations on Financial Intermediation.
Attributing thehistorically unprecedented widening of the trade deficit, as well as thesimilarly unprecedented rise in our international indebtedness, to thecoincidence of many random and unrelated developments would not make for a verysatisfying story. However, my sense is that many of the developments thatcontributed to the U.S. trade deficit are not unrelated and may be part of abroader evolution of the global economy. The same types of liberalization andinnovation that have improved financial intermediation within the UnitedStates, for example, have likely been instrumental in reducing home bias andincreasing intermediation among countries. Improvements in financial markets,both at home and abroad, may have amplified the effects on the U.S. currentaccount of other developments I have discussed, including the U.S. productivitysurge and the perceived weakening of foreign investment opportunities. It iseven possible that the expansion of the U.S. budget deficit would have beensmaller had policymakers perceived global financial markets to be less willingto finance the gap.