基于目标的风险度量方法

VaR和CVaR在国内外风险管理实践中得到了普遍应用,但监管者以概率置信水平作为其监管目标的方法对于实际投资者的风险度量而言并不是很直观,投资者更加关心的是资产目标价值能否实现的风险.将资产的目标价值以直观的方式加入到风险的定义中,提出了广义一致风险测度公理假设,并证明了广义一致风险测度也具有很好的性质.此外,看跌期权作为测度风险的有效方法,具有直观的经济含义,可以证明它满足广义一致风险测度公理假设.最后建立了看跌期权费风险测度和E-VaR/E-CVaR之间的数量关系.     

基于目标的风险度量方法

VaR和CVaR在国内外风险管理实践中得到了普遍应用,但监管者以概率置信水平作为其监管目标的方法对于实际投资者的风险度量而言并不是很直观,投资者更加关心的是资产目标价值能否实现的风险.将资产的目标价值以直观的方式加入到风险的定义中,提出了广义一致风险测度公理假设,并证明了广义一致风险测度也具有很好的性质.此外,看跌期权作为测度风险的有效方法,具有直观的经济含义,可以证明它满足广义一致风险测度公理假设.最后建立了看跌期权费风险测度和E-VaR/E-CVaR之间的数量关系.     

中国燃油期货市场的VaR与ES风险度量

近年来,我国燃油期货市场取得快速发展,但有关该市场波动特征和风险状况的研究却非常缺乏。以上海期货交易所燃油期货价格指数为例,分别在多头和空头两种头寸状况以及5种不同分位数水平下,运用条件覆盖检验、非条件覆盖检验等后验分析方法,实证对比了不同风险测度模型对VaR和ES两种不同风险指标估计的精度差异。研究结果表明:在我国燃油期货市场的风险测度估计中考虑国际燃油价格波动因素有助于获得更为精准的风险测度精度;在综合考虑了模型对价格变化动力学的刻画效果以及对极端风险的测度精度等因素后,FIGARCH_CST-SST模型是一个相对合理的风险测度模型选择。     

我国农产品期货市场的风险测度模型及其后验分析

近年来,我国农产品期货市场取得快速发展,但有关该市场波动特征和风险状况的研究却非常缺乏.以我国农产品期货市场中的4种代表性价格指数为例,首先对其价格变化统计特征及波动模式进行了全面深入的检验,然后运用严谨系统的后验分析(Backtesting analysis)方法,分别在多头和空头两种头寸状况以及5种不同分位数水平下,实证对比了8种风险测度模型对VaR (Value at Risk)和ES (Excepted shortfall)两种不同风险指标估计的精度差异.研究结果表明,我国农产品期货市场的价格波动不存在显著的杠杆效应(Leverage effect),但却具有明显的有偏(Skewed)和条件厚尾(Conditional fat-tail)特征.另外,在综合考虑了模型估计效率和风险测度精度后,基于有偏学生t分布的普通GARCH模型是一个相对合理的风险测度模型选择.     

对冲通胀风险的战略视角与微观选择

针对通货膨胀风险,以盯住通胀率为目标,基于随机混合整数规划模型(SMIP)构建了具有通胀保护功能的大宗商品期货投资组合,实现对通货膨胀率的动态跟踪.结果表明,基于盯住通胀率所构建的动态调整的商品期货投资组合能够以较低成本跑赢CPI指数,从而保证获得高于市场通胀率的较稳定的超额投资收益.对通胀保护能力的检验结果表明,商品期货投资组合具有良好的通胀保护功能,能够有效对冲通胀风险,有助于建立长期价格稳定机制.研究结果为企业和机构投资者在既定通胀水平下对冲通胀风险提供了一个具有战略意义的微观选择.     

中国证券公司系统性风险测度及演化特征研究——来自20家上市证券公司的数据

审慎监管条件下，对系统性风险进行准确测度并识别风险演化特征是对证券公司实施风险管理的首要环节。采用SCCA技术，构建Gumbel Copula模型刻画证券公司间的风险相依结构，并对监测指标J-VaR进行了改进，解决了模拟中不易逼近最小边界的问题。从微观、宏观两个层面分别对单个证券公司及整个证券公司系统的风险进行了测度和演化特征分析。实证结果表明系统性风险在大规模爆发前往往会存在部分公司共同表现出的小型波动前兆；证券公司系统性风险具有"陡增缓降"的特点且在风险传导阶段形成的多次冲击对整个体系具有较大的破坏力。     

基于时变高阶矩波动模型的VaR与ES度量

金融波动性建模经历了从常数高阶矩到时变高阶矩的发展历程.文章扩展了现有的针对时变高阶矩波动模型风险测度效果的研究:首先,以沪深300指数和其它世界股市若干重要指数为例,通过采用“从简单模型到复杂模型”的估计步骤,实现对时变高阶矩波动模型的估计,进而运用Gram-Charlier扩展分布获得对VaR(value-at-risk)和ES(excepted shortfall)两种不同风险测度的计算值;然后,分别利用非条件覆盖检验(unconditional coverage test)和基于自举法(Bootstrap)的后验分析方法,实证对比了时变高阶矩和常数高阶矩两类模型的适用范围和精确程度.研究结果表明:就所考察的若干指数样本而言,时变高阶矩模型不仅能够较好地刻画金融价格波动的整体动力学特征,并且总体来讲,在市场风险测度准确性方面也要优于常数高阶矩波动模型.     

系统风险冲击、企业创新能力与股票价格波动性:理论与实证

系统风险冲击和企业创新能力通过影响企业经营基本面和投资者行为而对股票价格波动性产生影响。本文首先建立数学模型从理论上研究系统风险冲击和企业创新能力对股票价格波动性的影响机理;然后以中国A股上市公司2013-2017年期间的相关数据为样本,以2013-2017年期间中国沪深300指数跌幅超过18%的持续性下跌为系统风险冲击源,从创新投入、创新产出和创新环境三个维度构建创新能力指标,采用层次回归分析方法对理论模型结果进行实证检验。研究发现,股票价格波动性与系统风险冲击正相关,与企业创新能力负相关,企业创新能力能够弱化系统风险冲击对股票价格波动性的影响,进而增强股票市场稳定性。规范市场监管行为、改革上市和退市制度、优化创新激励机制、完善上市公司信息披露制度是降低系统风险冲击影响、保障股票市场稳定发展的重要途径。     

基于多标度分形理论的金融风险测度指标研究

多标度分形(multifractal)理论是一种刻画金融市场波动复杂性特征的有力工具,而金融价格时间序列的多标度分形谱(multifractal spectrum)则是对测度对象复杂性特征的一种具体和全面的描述.以上海证券交易所综合股价指数高频价格时间序列的多标度分形谱计算为例,建立了基于多标度分形谱两个主要参数的市场风险测度指标Rf,弥补了传统风险测度指标在非有效市场条件下的不足.通过对上证综指的实证研究验证了这一指标的有效性,并对其在价格波动预测方面的作用进行了初步的探讨和理论解释.     

基于Skew-t-FIAPARCH的金融市场动态风险VaR测度研究

本文引入FIAPARCH模型刻画金融价格条件波动率特征,引入有偏学生t分布捕获收益率有偏特征,并以此来测度金融市场动态风险VaR;进而运用返回测试和动态分位数回归方法对风险测度模型准确性进行实证检验.结果表明,RiskMetrics和GARCH-N测度金融市场的风险的可靠性差;有偏学生t分布比正态分布、学生t分布更能准确反应金融收益分布实际特征,具有更高的风险测度能力;FIAPARCH-SKST展示出比其它模型具有绝对优越的风险测度效果.     

相关性下的银行风险集成研究综述

银行风险之间的相关关系会使风险之间相互转化，相互影响，令风险呈现出放大或者缩小的趋势，显著影响着银行风险度量结果的准确性。银行风险集成致力于在充分考虑银行风险相关关系的基础上，对银行风险进行较为准确的度量。但是银行风险具有相关关系种类繁多、表现形式复杂、以及数据的可获得性差等显著特征，导致银行风险的集成度量领域存在诸多挑战。本文对相关性下的银行风险集成研究进行综述，具体从集成对象、集成方法和集成数据三个层次系统展开。首先对银行风险及其蕴含的种类繁多的相关关系类型进行解析，然后分析银行风险相关关系表征出的多种复杂特性，根据对这些特性的刻画能力对银行风险的集成方法进行划分和比较，最后总结了获取银行风险集成数据的多种途径。在此基础上，进一步分析了银行风险集成研究的难点和未来趋势。     

Taxonomic Analysis of Perceived Risk: Modeling Individual and Group Perceptions Within Homogeneous Hazard Domains

Previous studies of risk perception have typically focused on the mean judgments of a group of people regarding the riskiness (or safety) of a diverse set of hazardous activities, substances, and technologies. This paper reports the results of two studies that take a different path. Study 1 investigated whether models within a single technological domain were similar to previous models based on group means and diverse hazards. Study 2 created a group taxonomy of perceived risk for only one technological domain, railroads, and examined whether the structure of that taxonomy corresponded with taxonomies derived from prior studies of diverse hazards. Results from Study 1 indicated that the importance of various risk characteristics in determining perceived risk differed across individuals and across hazards, but not so much as to invalidate the results of earlier studies based on group means and diverse hazards. In Study 2, the detailed analysis of railroad hazards produced a structure that had both important similarities to, and dissimilarities from, the structure obtained in prior research with diverse hazard domains. The data also indicated that railroad hazards are really quite diverse, with some approaching nuclear reactors in their perceived seriousness. These results suggest that information about the diversity of perceptions within a single domain of hazards could provide valuable input to risk-management decisions.     

The Theory of Risk Homeostasis: Implications for Safety and Health

No strategy for countermeasure design or future directions of research in the areas of human behavior which leads to traffic accidents or lifestyle-related diseases can be rationally developed without an acceptable working theory of human behavior in these domains. For this purpose, an attempt has been made to conceptually integrate the available evidence with respect to the role of human behavior in the causation of road accidents. From this integrative effort it would seem that the accident rate is ultimately dependent on one factor only, the target level of risk in the population concerned which acts as the reference variable in a homeostatic process relating accident rate to human motivation. Various policy tactics for the purpose of modifying this target level of risk have been pointed out and the theory of risk homeostasis has been speculatively extended to the areas of lifestyle-dependent morbidity and mortality.     

A general guideline for management of risk from carcinogens

A simple relationship is formulated that helps to discriminate between acceptable and unacceptable individual lifetime risks (RL) to populations that are exposed to chemical carcinogens. The relationship is an empirical one and is developed using objective risk data as well as subjective risk levels that have found substantial acceptance among those concerned with carcinogenic risk assessment issues. The expression sets acceptable levels of lifetime carcinogenic risk and is a function of the total population exposed to the carcinogen. Its use in risk assessment and risk management provides guidance in distinguishing those carcinogens that should be regulated because of the health hazard they pose from those whose regulation may not be needed.     

A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk

A unique multidisciplinary perspective on the risk literature is used to establish a fresh and provocative argument regarding the epistemological understanding and definition of risk. Building on economic conceptualizations that distinguish risk from uncertainty and argue that risk is an ordered application of knowledge to the unknown, the survey identifies each of the disciplines as having a particular knowledge approach with which they confront the unknown so as to order its randomness and convert it into a risk proposition. This epistemological approach suggests the concept of risk can act as a mirror, reflecting the preoccupations, strengths, and weaknesses of each discipline as they grapple with uncertainty. The conclusion suggests that the different disciplines can, and desirably should, act in concert toward a cumulative appreciation of risk that progresses our understanding of the concept. One way in which the article challenges risk experts to join disciplinary forces in a collaborative effort is to holistically appreciate and articulate the concept of political risk calculation.     

Trust,Emotion, Sex,Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-Assessment Battlefield

Risk management has become increasingly politicized and contentious. Polarized views, controversy, and conflict have become pervasive. Research has begun to provide a new perspective on this problem by demonstrating the complexity of the concept risk and the inadequacies of the traditional view of risk assessment as a purely scientific enterprise. This paper argues that danger is real, but risk is socially constructed. Risk assessment is inherently subjective and represents a blending of science and judgment with important psychological, social, cultural, and political factors. In addition, our social and democratic institutions, remarkable as they are in many respects, breed distrust in the risk arena. Whoever controls the definition of risk controls the rational solution to the problem at hand. If risk is defined one way, then one option will rise to the top as the most cost-effective or the safest or the best. If it is defined another way, perhaps incorporating qualitative characteristics and other contextual factors, one will likely get a different ordering of action solutions. Defining risk is thus an exercise in power. Scientific literacy and public education are important, but they are not central to risk controversies. The public is not irrational. Their judgments about risk are influenced by emotion and affect in a way that is both simple and sophisticated. The same holds true for scientists. Public views are also influenced by worldviews, ideologies, and values; so are scientists' views, particularly when they are working at the limits of their expertise. The limitations of risk science, the importance and difficulty of maintaining trust, and the complex, sociopolitical nature of risk point to the need for a new approach—one that focuses upon introducing more public participation into both risk assessment and risk decision making in order to make the decision process more democratic, improve the relevance and quality of technical analysis, and increase the legitimacy and public acceptance of the resulting decisions.     

The Use of Individual and Societal Risk Criteria Within the Dutch Flood Safety Policy—Nationwide Estimates of Societal Risk and Policy Applications

The Dutch government is in the process of revising its flood safety policy. The current safety standards for flood defenses in the Netherlands are largely based on the outcomes of cost‐benefit analyses. Loss of life has not been considered separately in the choice for current standards. This article presents the results of a research project that evaluated the potential roles of two risk metrics, individual and societal risk, to support decision making about new flood safety standards. These risk metrics are already used in the Dutch major hazards policy for the evaluation of risks to the public. Individual risk concerns the annual probability of death of a person. Societal risk concerns the probability of an event with many fatalities. Technical aspects of the use of individual and societal risk metrics in flood risk assessments as well as policy implications are discussed. Preliminary estimates of nationwide levels of societal risk are presented. Societal risk levels appear relatively high in the southwestern part of the country where densely populated dike rings are threatened by a combination of river and coastal floods. It was found that cumulation, the simultaneous flooding of multiple dike rings during a single flood event, has significant impact on the national level of societal risk. Options for the application of the individual and societal risk in the new flood safety policy are presented and discussed.     

Ecological Risk Ranking: Development and Evaluation of a Method for Improving Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making

This article reports an extension of the Carnegie Mellon risk-ranking method to incorporate ecological risks and their attributes. On the basis of earlier risk-perception studies, we identified a set of 20 relevant attributes for describing health, safety, and environmental hazards in standardized risk summary sheets. In a series of three ranking sessions, 23 laypeople ranked 10 such hazards in a fictional Midwestern U.S. county using both holistic and multiattribute ranking procedures. Results were consistent with those from previous studies involving only health and safety hazards, providing additional evidence for the validity of the method and the replicability of the resulting rankings. Holistic and multiattribute risk rankings were reasonably consistent both for individuals and for groups. Participants reported that they were satisfied with the procedures and results, and indicated their support for using the method to advise real-world risk-management decisions. Agreement among participants increased over the course of the exercise, perhaps because the materials and deliberations helped participants to correct their misconceptions and clarify their values. Overall, health and safety attributes were judged more important than environmental attributes. However, the overlap between the importance rankings of these two sets of attributes suggests that some information about environmental impacts is important to participants' judgments in comparative risk-assessment tasks.     

Appraisal of Individual Radiation Risk in the Context of Probabilistic Exposures

There exists a growing desire to base safety criteria in different fields on the same principles. The current approach by the international Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) to control radiation exposure touches many aspects such as social, psychological, or economic factors that are important for such principles. This paper attempts to further explore possible ways of defining a common basis for dealing with radiation risks and other safety problems. Specifically, it introduces the following issues: (1) different types of risk are judged differently. To account for this, the concept of risk categories is introduced. (2) The dimension of time may play an important role. There is a difference between an immediate death and a death occurring 20 years after exposure to radiation. Effects such as reduced quality of life after exposure and reduction of lifetime expectancy are discussed. The paper suggests to introduce an individual risk equivalent which allows to compare risks as defined in various fields. Furthermore, it suggests the use of risk acceptance criteria which depend on the different categories of risk.     

Why Study Risk Perception?

Studies of risk perception examine the opinions people express when they are asked, in various ways, to characterize and evaluate hazardous activities and technologies. This research aims to aid risk analysis and societal decision making by (i) improving methods for eliciting opinions about risk, (ii) providing a basis for understanding and anticipating public responses to hazards, and (iii) improving the communication of risk information among laypeople, technical experts, and policy makers.