Why (Re)insurance is not systemic

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
  <record>
    <leader>00000cab a2200000   4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">MAP20140031832</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20140918165629.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">140915e20140901esp|||p      |0|||b|spa d</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">MAP</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">5</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080104276</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Kessler, Denis</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">Why (Re)insurance is not systemic</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Denis Kessler</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">The traditional model of (re)insurance lacks the elements that make a financial institution systemically important: risks are effectively pulverized; liabilities tend to be prefunded, which eliminates most of the leverage in the traditional sense; and active asset-liability management reduces most of the liquidity mismatch that traditionally propagates systemic risk. (Re)insurers that have stuck to this traditional business model have successfully weathered the crisis, even playing a stabilizing role. Unfortunately, this is not sufficiently recognized in the current IAIS-FSB debate on assessing systemic risk in the (re)insurance sector.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080602529</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Mercado de reaseguros</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080591182</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Gerencia de riesgos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20100016923</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Riesgo sistémico</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080610777</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Evolución del reaseguro</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080611880</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Perspectivas del seguro</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20110024864</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Modelos de negocio</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20110021238</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Estabilidad financiera</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080627966</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Control de entidades financieras</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080579814</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Crisis financiera</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="w">MAP20077000727</subfield>
      <subfield code="t">The Journal of risk and insurance</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">Nueva York : The American Risk and Insurance Association, 1964-</subfield>
      <subfield code="x">0022-4367</subfield>
      <subfield code="g">01/09/2014 Volumen 81 Número 3 - septiembre 2014 , p. 477-488</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>