财务风险的社会层面[文献翻译].doc

原文：The social dimensions of financial riskAs money has come to play a central role in modem society the risk of losing money, financial risk, is a major concern for individuals and societies. The loss of a job would not only have an impact on an individuals source of income, but could threaten the individuals entire livelihood and break up the family. Similarly, the loss of a pension could mean hunger, illness and misery for an old-aged pensioner. The loss of savings through the collapse of a bank could have a devastating blow on individuals. For corporations, financial risk can affect the value of their business investments and financial assets. At a societal level, the bankruptcy of a currency, as happened recently to the Mexican peso, could have a dramatic impact on the entire economy.The aim of this paper is to analyse present day knowledge about financial risk and evaluate the extent to which it provides a comprehensive understanding of risk. The findings suggest that because of the obsession with objectivity and mathematical calculation, risk analysis in finance leaves a lot to be desired. Risk analysis in finance theoryTo summarise the present understanding of risk in finance, the only way to do so reasonably is to list various topics under which risk is covered. These are: individual preferences and attitudes to risk: risk averse, risk neutral, risk seeker portfolio theory: risk as variance of return, risk reduction through diversification, beta risk and the capital asset pricing model option volatility and the risk of derivative securities measuring risk using probability theory: state-preference theory risk management: hedging strategies, bond duration and volatility, portfolio insurance different types of asset risk eg interest rate risk, market risk, credit/default risk.The above list of topics demonstrates the partial and disjointed understanding of risk in finance. One of the central concerns of finance is the valuation of securities, and risk is only really examined and explored to the extent that it influences the valuation. However, examined from a societal perspective, the importance attached to valuation is directly tied to the belief in efficient markets as a means of resolving social problems. This precept is the subject of debate in the social sciences. The assumption that if efficient and competitive markets can be ensured then there is no need to worry about risk seems far-fetched, especially when systemic risks are examined.On individual attitudes to risk, a description is given of different types of risk positions adopted: risk-averse, risk neutral and risk seeker. Individuals are risk averse if they intend to match risk with reward and would only take on more risk if there is an expectation of a higher return. Risk neutral individuals are indifferent towards risk, and risk seekers are those who love to take on risk, even if the returns may not be commensurately high. The analysis then goes on to assume that most individuals are risk averse, and this is the basis for the subsequent measurement of risk. No empirical proof is provided of this assumption, nor is there any questioning of the link between risk and financial reward, there is an implicit assumption that risks are acceptable provided there are high potential rewards.In terms of risk measurement, the breakthrough in finance was made by Markowitz when he suggested that risk can be measured by standard deviation, and assuming asset returns are normally distributed, this opened up a whole series of techniques of risk measurement using standard statistical and mathematical methods. The entire distribution of returns of an asset could now be described by two statistics, mean and standard deviation. The question as to whether standard deviation is an adequate or complete measure of risk, or whether the assumption of normal distribution of asset returns is empirically valid, was somehow ignored or seen to be too trivial. Similarly, the focus on distribution of returns detached the issue of individual or societal preferences and attitudes towards risk from the measurement of risk.Another approach used to evaluate risk is through the application of the mathematics of probability theory. Probabilities of alternative states of nature and state-contingent payoffs for individual securities can be combined to calculate values when outcomes are uncertain. The major breakthrough for the valuation of derivative securities came from the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Hull explains that this model was a breakthrough because the outcome was independent of individual risk preferences. The key to the formula was the assumption of risk-neutrality. Hull argues that although the assumption was necessary for the derivation of the formula, the outcome is independent of risk preferences, and that is why the Black-Scholes formula is such a major breakthrough.The emphasis on risk management and the sub-categorisation of risks interest rate risk, market risk, credit risk are all attempts at grappling with the reality of specific risks as they affect firms and individuals. For example, for bankers, the evaluation of credit risk is paramount if they are to make profitable lending decisions. Techniques for evaluating these have evolved in finance which provides useful inroads into the assessment of default. Thus, quite sophisticated methods of risk analysis have evolved in areas where there is commercial benefit from accurate analysis. However, such approaches do not always enhance the scientific knowledge base of the fundamental components of financial risk and how they interrelate.Dimensions of financial riskThe Oxford Dictionary defines risk as a chance of hazard, or of bad consequences, loss . this broad definition is similar to the working definition of financial risk in this paper, ie the risk or chance of losing money. The point could be elaborated by asking financial risk suffered by whom individuals, communities or societies? In finance, risk is usually understood as variance or volatility and is seen to have both a downside and an upside there is a risk-return trade off. However, the way it has been defined thus far focuses on the downside element of risk, which is the risk of loss, damage, etc. This aspect of risk and its importance is very real when considering individuals and societies。Apart from the pure financial dimensions or risk, there are ethical and psychological components which are central to unravelling financial risk. For example, if monetary savings are seen as a means of improving personal security, then a loss of savings can lead to significant personal insecurity. This can have damaging psychological consequences. Similarly, if a job is seen as a way of keeping oneself occupied and feeling useful, then loss of job is not just a financial blow, but also a devastating psychological and emotional blow. Similar analyses can be extended to communities and societies. When communities suffer a bank or currency collapse, which could be influenced by elements beyond their control, then recovery from it， can be very costly, both financially and psychologically. Beck argues for the explicit consideration of these dimensions of risk, because they are as real in their impact as the pure financial dimensions, perhaps even more so. And just because they cannot easily be measured does not mean that they should be ignored. He writes:In the risk society, additional skills become vitally necessary. Here, the ability to anticipate and endure dangers, to deal with them biographically and politically acquires importance. In place of fears of losing status, class consciousness and orientation to upward mobility, which we have more or less learned to handle, other central questions appear. How do we handle ascribed outcomes of danger and the fears and insecurities which reside in them? How can we cope with the fear, if we cannot overcome the causes of the fear? How can we live on the volcano of civilisation without deliberately forgetting about it, but also without suffocating on the fears and not just on the vapours that the volcano exudes? Financial risk can thus be analysed at two different levels individual and societal. At the individual level, the primary concerns would be the personal welfare、ethical and emotional/psychological impact of financial risks. At a societal level, financial risk can lead to inflation and unemployment。For example, a large-scale banking collapse could lead to a widespread loss of savings, affecting the middle and upper classes more than the lower classes, Individual level The principal financial assets of most individuals comprise their personal wealth and sources of income. Thus for individuals, the primary dimensions of financial risk would include their savings, investments, and their job/occupational income. Insurance companies in the western world often price a range of personal financial risks and sell products to enable individuals to manage or reduce these risks. For example, insurance policies to protect an individuals home mortgage payments in the event of loss of job or an accident are currently available. Similarly, life insurance policies are designed to protect families from financial risk especially when a principal bread-winner dies. Thus, the commercial sector has utilised finance and statistical tools to be able to price these risks commercially and spread the risks so that individuals can hedge these risks.However, this is also where finance stops, but the reality and impact of the risk do not disappear. For example, financial compensation for the loss of a job can be helpful, but does not give the individual a new job. To this extent, the hedge or insurance fails completely. The personal and societal costs of unemployment are huge and well documented. The fear of a job loss can also influence individual behaviour. Individuals differ in their perceptions or risks, and in their responses to them. When finance theory ignores or trivialises it, the result can be incomplete and misleading. Societal level At a societal level, critical questions relating to the social impact of financial risk are left unasked and unresolved. For example, the rise of financial markets as a medium for transmission of savings and credit is applauded as a great boon in finance. However, the history and experiment of financial markets and innovation has been short and rather bumpy. Fashionable markets, such as in Latin America, boom and bust in short periods of time. Similarly, derivatives are enhancing market efficiency on the one hand, and destroying financial institutions on the other. Does financial innovation actually help the transmission of risks, or does it create a greater risk society, with an increasing dependence on markets for its public health and welfare? Financial innovation certainly benefits the experts in finance, but whether or not it benefits others is still an open question.Financial markets pressurise companies to produce positive financial results in the short term, and at the same time force them away from thinking about longer-term benefits for their stakeholders. It is financial performance which is paramount, all else is secondary. Similarly, the proliferation of insurance products might help individuals to manage some of their risks but may also spread a culture of irresponsibility in society. For example, there may be less concern about personal health if an individual is insured for medical expenses. Financial products which encourage individuals to borrow in different sorts of ways allow them to postpone their obligations to future periods and generations. When a country like the USA is in huge debt, with a trillion dollar budget deficit, it takes on significant financial risk with potentially damaging consequences for its citizens. The idea that a whole community of people can borrow resources and leave repayment to future generations sounds absurd, but is easily facilitated by financial markets. Risk consciousnessFor individuals and societies to understand, recognise and manage financial risks, they need to be conscious of the nature and extent of the risk they face. One no longer ascends merely from personal experience to general judgements, but rather general knowledge devoid of personal experience becomes the central determinant of personal experience. . . Ultimately, no-one can know about risks, so long as to know means to have consciously experienced. Thus when insurance companies evaluate personal health risks, and draw up elaborate contacts of what is covered, they rely on health experts who operate businesses for commercial gain. The risk analysis is not directed toward individual benefit or health improvement but toward more abstract concerns with the financial profitability of a series of risks. When an insured person falls ill with an illness not covered in the contract, this would be the first time the person experiences the reality of the risk and its impact could be devastating.Source: Atul K. Shah, 1997.“The social dimensions of financial risk”. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance,vol.5,no.3,May.pp.195-205.译文：财务风险的社会层面在现代社会中，由于资金已经到了发挥核心作用，货币损失风险以及财务modem society the risk of losing money, fina风险，是个人和社会主要关心的问题societies。就像失去工作，不仅会影响一个人的收入来源，还可能会威胁到一个人的生活甚至破坏到整个家庭。同样，失去退休金可能会影响一个退休老人的温饱，疾病和痛苦。当银行倒闭使储蓄损失，对储户来说是个毁灭性的打击。对于企业，财务风险可能会影响他们的业务投资和财务资产的价值。在一个社会层面，货币的破产，像最近发生在墨西哥比索，就可能对整个经济产生巨大影响。Yet the understanding and analysis of本文的主要目的是分析有关财务风险的知识和现今的评价它在何种程度上提供了一个全面的风险认识。调查结果显示，由于对客观性和数学计算，风险分析在金融界还有很多不足之处。财务理论中的风险分析：总结当前的财务风险的认识，唯一的办法就是列出各种各样的话题下的风险覆盖。它们是：个人喜好和对风险态度：风险规避，风险中性，风险寻找者投资组合理论：风险方差的回报率，通过多样化减少风险，贝塔风险和资本资产定价模型期权波动率和衍生证券风险利用概率理论衡量风险：国有偏好理论理论风险管理：避险策略，债券的期限和波动性，投资组合保险不同类型的资产风险例如：利率风险、市场风险、信用/违约风险。上面所列的主题展示了在财务风险中部分和无法理解的风险。其中一个重要的工作内容是对证券的评价，和风险问题只有在某种程度上的审查和探索，它才影响估值。然而，从社会角度进行审查，重视估值最重要的是在有效的市场把直接挂钩的信念作为解决社会问题的一种手段。这规则在社会科学一直是被考虑的。假设如果效率和竞争力，能够确保那么就没有必要担心风险似乎太牵强了，尤其是当系统性风险进行审查时。对个人态度上的风险，采用介绍不同类型的风险立场：风险规避、风险中性和风险寻找者。个人是风险规避的，如果他们打算其风险与报酬相匹配，如果有一个较高的期望回报，只会承担更多的风险。而那些对风险中性个人和那些风险爱好者，即使回报可能会不分别高。接着分析风险厌恶的大多数人，这是进行后续风险计量的基础。没有经验证明这种假设，也没有任何经济报酬和风险之间的联系和质疑，但有一个隐含的假设，风险可以接受的条件是有高回报潜力。在风险测量中，其财务技术是由马科维茨突破的，他建议，风险可以用标准偏差来测量，并假设资产收益率呈正态分布的，该建议开辟了一个完整的风险计量技术并使用标准的统计和数学方法。对资产收益的全部收益，现在可以由两个统计描述：均值和标准差。作为对问题是否是一个标准差对风险的充分或完整的措施，或是否对资产收益的正态分布假设是有效的经验，在某种程度上忽视或认为是太微不足道的。同样，收益的分配重点超脱个人或社会的偏好和对从风险计量中风险态度的问题。用于风险评估的另一种方法是通过数学概率理论中的应用。自然状态的概率和依存状态的选择为个别证券所造成的后果计算结果相结合的价值是不确定的。衍生证券估值的重大突破来自布莱克斯科尔斯的期权定价模型。赫尔解释说，这个模型是一个突破，因为这个结果是与个体风险偏好无关的，其公式的关键是风险中立的假设。赫尔认为，虽然这个假设是由必要的计算公式推导的，其推导结果是独立于风险的偏好，这就是为什么布莱克斯科尔斯公式是这样一个重大的突破。风险管理的重点和利率风险、市场风险、信用风险都试图应对现实中的特定风险，因为它们的一切会影响企业和个人。例如，对于银行，信贷风险的评估是至关重要的，如果他们要取得盈利的贷款决定。评估这些因素的技术已经延伸到能够对违约评估提供有益侵蚀的财务领域，因此，相对复杂的风险分析方法也已经延伸到能够从准确分析中获得商业利益的区域中了。然而，这种方法并不总是提高财务风险，以及它们如何相互关联的基本组成部分的科学知识基础。财务风险尺寸chance of hazard, or of bad consequences,牛津字典定义风险为“危险的机会，或不良后果，loss .亏损.”这种广泛的定义类似于the working definition of financial risk in财务风险的实际定义，即this paper, ie the risk or chance of losing本文的“风险或亏损的机会”。这一点The point could be elaborated by其原因可以通过询问受风险的个人、社区或社会来阐释？在财务中，风险通常被理解为方差或波动，被认为既有不利的一面又有一个风险回报取舍。不过However, the way不过，它迄今已定义的方面侧重于风险的负面因素，如该风险of loss, damage, etc. This aspect of risk and丢失，损坏等。这种风险，其重要方面是非常真实的，因为它考虑个人和社会。对解决财务风险极为重要的组件除了单纯的财务问题或风险，还有道德和心理。例如，如果货币储蓄作为提高人身安全的一种手段，那么损失的储蓄可能会导致重大人身的不安，这可能有破坏性的心理后果。同样，如果一份工作作为保持自己忙碌和感觉自己有用的一种方式，那么失去工作不仅是一个财务上的冲击，而且在心理和情绪上也有破坏性的打击。类似的分析可以扩展到社区和社会。当社会受到银行或货币崩溃，这可能会受到他们无法控制的因素的影响，然后从这个事件中恢复