Can We Regulate Systemic Risk?

If we try to save money now, we risk spending much more later.

If you're thinking about people taking too much risk and not understanding how much risk they're taking or taking too little risk, we need to think about that.

We see a growing risk of proliferation, of catastrophic terrorism.

And yet we risk being led astray by memories of 1979.

The greatest risk we face lies in continuing down this path.

We must continue to reduce the prevalence and risk of war.

We must then break the perverse feedback loop between banking risk and sovereign risk that is at the heart of the euro crisis.

We must face up to the risk of an avian influenza pandemic.

We have criteria for genetic testing of both BRCA1 and BRCA2 and guidelines for risk adapted surveillance programs including, where appropriate, risk reducing surgery.

Global warming is a risk that we simply cannot afford to ignore anymore.

But any risk must be weighed against other grave threats that we face.

So, are we at risk of another cycle of financial boom and bust?

On a global scale, we are living in daily risk of terrorist attacks.

We run the risk of jeopardizing the Agenda if we cannot make the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference a success.

We know, or at least we ought to know, how to build political institutions that accept the mission of macroeconomic stabilization, and how to build financial institutions to mobilize risk bearing capacity and spread risk.

We reaffirm the vital role of the United Nations system in disaster risk reduction.

Climate change will be a major driver of such events, and we risk much worse.

But, in fact, we are not all affected by longevity risk in the same way.

This brings me to my third point we must reconceptualize the meaning of market risk.

That way, when the risk modelers get it wrong, we will be in less trouble.

GDP risk is a long term risk.

In addition and as a complement to re regulation, we need a comprehensive systemic risk monitor.

Unfortunately, we are very far from the idealized world in which financial markets efficiently share risk.

No matter what we do or fail to do, the risk of unacceptable disasters will persist.

After all, as we now know only too well, systemic risk can emerge in unexpected places.

And when it diverts from what you want, we prioritize risk, we evaluate not just the new stuff, but the old stuff.

We have but one planet, and should treasure it. Global warming is a risk that we simply cannot afford to ignore anymore.

But if we have no connection whatsoever with the worlds beyond the one we take for granted, then we too run the risk of drying up inside.

Should we in Europe really put at risk that progress by expressing an all too audible no ?

But when those preferences drive us too hard and too fast because we have overrated the difference between these futures, we are at risk.

So you see, if we sacrifice or risk our lives, it is because we in Africa have suffered too long and need your help.

The chief will be responsible for risk control of the Fund's investments as a whole in terms of portfolio risk, operational risk and compliance risk, and will plan and perform the oversight of performance measurement, investment risk analysis and operational risk analysis, including risk arising from sub adviser and service provider relationships.

By being less concerned with preventing default, we can make risk and reward more congruent with each other.

We go out door to door and risk our lives to save innocent children from being permanently handicapped.

As a result, sovereign risk is now becoming banking risk.

Unless we break the ugly trends of big money in politics and rampant consumerism, we risk winning economic productivity at the price of our humanity.

But if we believe that if we put a lid on history and leave it behind us we run a risk that history will resurrect itself with all its horrors.

We already have a full blown global recession. Unless governments get ahead of the problem, we risk a severe worldwide downturn unlike anything we have seen since the 1930 s.

The financial products being created didn t manage risk they enhanced risk.

The second way to reduce the financial system s sensitivity to risk estimation errors is to limit the flow of risks to institutions with a structural, rather than a statistical, capacity for holding that risk. That way, when the risk modelers get it wrong, we will be in less trouble.

Barring that, there is the risk that we will find out what caused this crisis after the next one.

We cannot run the risk of losing the expertise and the relationships that have been established over many years.

However, we need to be aware of the risk of making the local aid recipients overdependent on international assistance.

Risk reduction