2009年12月30日水曜日

APACA キックオフ・ミーティングを開催(2009年12月17日)


韓国で開催されたEAAC大会の、IACA Sectionの際に設立が合意されたAPACA(Asia Pacific Association of Consulting Actuaries)は、アジア・パシフィック地域のコンサルティング協会であるが、12月16日のIACA本体の電話会議で、設立をEndorseされたので、12月17日に電話会議で、第一回のキックオフミーティングを開催した。今後成長が期待される中国やインド経済にあって、コンサルティング・アクチュアリー市場の拡大も大きな目標の一つである。
創設時のメンバーは、次のとおりである。

Hideyuki E. Yoshida       Chair     Japan
Ken Buffin         Vice Chair USA
Liyaquat Khan   Executive Director/Treasurer India
Ken Hohman         CCA delegate USA
Nick Salter         ACA delegate UK
Grace Jiang         APACA member China
Patrick Gin Guan Cheah    APACA member Malaysia
Martin Stevenson    APACA member Australia
Wong, Ka-Man         APACA member Hong Kong
Mark Saunders         APACA member Hong Kong
Ken Sugita         APACA member Japan
Risza Bambang         APACA member Indonesia
Haris Eko Santoso     APACA member Indonesia
Chan Young Han         APACA member Korea
Yin Lawn         APACA member Taiwan
Andrew Leung         APACA member Thailand
Maistry, Gavin         APACA member Singapore
Adrian Waddingham      Advisor      UK
Brent Walker          Advisor      Australia
Chris Daykin          Advisor UK
Jay Jaffe Advisor USA
Stuart Leckie Advisor Hong Kong

また、当日の議事録は、次のとおりである。

APACA 1st Executive Committee meeting

Minutes – draft

Date/time: Thursday, 17th Dec. 2009: from 12:00 hrs to 13:30 hrs Tokyo local time

Medium: All by Conference call

Members Participated;

1) Hideyuki, Chair
2) Ken Buffin, Vice Chair
3) Liyaquat, Executive Director
4) Ken Hohman, CCA Delegate from US
5) Patrick Chea, Member from Malaysia
6) Wong Ka-Man, Member from HK
7) Risza Bambang, Member from Indonesia
8) Chan Young-Han, Member from Korea
9) Yin Lawn, Member from Taiwan
10) Andrew Leung, Member from Thailand
11) Maistry, Gavin, Member from Singapore
12) Brent Walker, Advisor from Australia
13) Stuart Leckie, Advisor from HK

Members absent with regrets;
1) Nick Salter, ACA Delegate from UK
2) Grace Jiang, Member from China
3) Martin Stevenson, Member from Australia
4) Mark Saunders, Member from HK
5) Ken Sugita, Member from Japan
6) Haris Santoso, Member from Indonesia
7) Adrian Waddingham, Advisor from UK
8) Chris Daykin, Advisor from UK
9) Jay Jaffe, Advisor from US

Deliberations:

Agenda Discussion/Decision                        Action
1 – Welcome by Hideyuki and introduction of APACA and its Objectives Hideyuki welcomed all present and recalled his presentation during APACA launch on 14th Oct. 2009 on the sides of 15th eaac in Seoul. In particular he brought attention to item (ii) of Article 2 of IACA Rules, the source for APACA Objectives. He also brought to attention, the presentation by Nick Salter on ACA and Ken Hohman on CCA. These three docs were circulated by him in the morning for ease of reference during the meeting. None
2 – Brief introduction by each participant and Roll call by Liyaquat. The Participants introduced themselves. During the proceedings it came out that the APACA EC excel file containing CV of each members was not available with every body. Liyaquat offered to send the latest version. Liyaquat to circulate the latest ver. Of the APACA EC excel file.
3 - Actuarial consulting scenario including current specific issues and future prospect: Each participant to briefly comment on his/her Country's scenario. Each participant from APACA Region described the scenario. Please refer attached Note. None
4 Short-term Action plan say over y2010;
- Recruitment of APACA members
- Activities by APACA that would help growth in consulting capacity and capabilities

Hideyuki dealt with this item including Agenda item (5) and referred back to the APACA launch presentation item numbers 3: Proposed Key activities of APACA, item 4: The Road map and item 5: the Membership. In particular suggested;
1 - Regional Seminars on Hot Topics,
2 -Working with Governments and Regulators for enhancing the role of actuarial consultants – it was taken on record that though each country was different, APACA can take up common issues. All members
5 Medium Term Action Plan say upto y 2012;
- Workshops/seminars aimed to increase capacity/capability: how many and where
- Linking up with ACA in UK and CCA in US and East Asian Actuarial Congress: how and in what form?
- y2012 Joint Consulting Colloquium
3 - Creation of consulting actuaries’/firms data base
4 – Actions to enhance status of consulting roles.
5 – Bylaws/Rules to be drawn
6 – Legal framework for PACA – no need as APACA is a creation and part of IACA
7 – Terms of reference, Mission & Strategy including Action Plan over first three years to be drawn.
8 – APACA Logo – to be created
9 – Participation in 16th eaac in Kuala Lampur – APACA to participate
10 – APACA Secretariat – along with existing Actuaries’ Office in HK: matter under discussion
11 – Venue for next Joint (IACA + IAAHS + PBSS) Colloquium in y2012 in APACA Region: members to communicate within this month, whether their respective associations are willing to host the Colloquium. If not possible in APACA Region, then probably the venue will be in EU region. Ultimate decision will rest with the three Sections.
12 - Membership: All members to recruit members from their country for IACA with option for APACA.
Liyaquat explained steps in place through Member Services & Development Committee (MSDC) of IACA for enhancing the IACA Section of IAA Website and number of steps to enhance value creation of IACA members. All members
6 Any other matter
Next meeting: opinions differed from monthly, bi-monthly to the next meeting in three months time. It was taken note of the holidays hereafter including engaging activities in early part of Jan 2010. Liyaquat to send mail seeking convenient date in the 3rd or 4th week of Jan 2010. Liyaquat

初回なので、自己紹介と各国の市場の説明、コンサルタントの活用状況につき情報交換をおこなった。また、インドで開催される予定であった2012年のIACA/PBSS/IAAHS Joint Colloquiaについて、インド以外のアジアの国で開催することが決定されていたので、各国のアクチュアリー会にホスト国となる可能性はあるか、サウンドしてもらうこととした。一方、その後の12月23日の3つのSection Chairs & IAA leadershipの電話会議で、候補は香港かシンガポールに絞られた。クリス・ダイキン氏の送ったシンガポールア会のシニアメンバーへの書簡に対しては、かなり前向きの回答が着ている。香港については、年明けまで待たないと回答は得られない。

2009年12月15日火曜日

ERM Webinar 今年も無事に終了

今年で3年目になるERM Webinarは、12月1日に日本時間の昼過ぎから開始され無事にすべてのリージョン(アジア、欧州、北米)でプログラムを予定どおりに終えることができた。
今年のプログラムは、各リージョン共通で、次の4つのトピックスで統一されている。私は、アジア地域全体のCoordinatorの役割を果たし、半年以上にわたっての欧米の委員との電話会議で内容をつめるとともに、スピーカーの募集を行った。香港のアクチュアリー会の事務局を経由してアジア各国と連絡をとり、日本アクチュアリー会の事務局とも密接に連携した。アジアの4つのセッションの司会は、Gavin Maistry(シンガポール),Hideyuki Yoshida(日本),Mary Liao(オーストラリア),Wong Ka Man(香港)がModeratorとして、各セッションのとりまとめを行った。今年のスピーカーで特筆すべきは、年金ERMについて、杉田健さん(日本アクチュアリー会副理事長)が、世界で始めて発表されたことである。興味のある方は、第4セッションにおいての発表をRecorded Versionが米国アクチュアリー会事務局から送付されてきたら、登録している方は、視聴できる。
Value Creation vs. Systemic Risk

US – Basic Level
UK – Basic Level
AP- Basic Level

Systemic Risk is a key concern for regulators worldwide in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and initiatives are underway to reduce systemic risk. For example the U.S. Treasury and Her Majesty’s Treasury in the UK have separately proposed financial regulatory reform including the establishment of a systemic risk regulator. Concerns have arisen over credit for diversification, group structures and market consistent valuation. However the insurance sector still needs to create value for their shareholders to remain viable and provide insurance services.

This session will consider some of the concerns around systemic risk and the drivers of value creation that have come under close attention by virtue of their links to systemic risk. The European session will also evaluate pension scheme concerns.

Approaches to ERM and Capital Models

US – Basic Level
UK – Advanced level
AP- Advanced Level

ERM approaches to setting capital requirements for the financial services industry are being revised and updated by various stakeholders around the globe. These changes will have a significant impact on the economic capital models (ECM) that insurers use. In the European Union, there is much focus on the implementation of Solvency II regulation and several countries in Asia and the Americas are contemplating adopting Solvency II into their own regimes. IAIS (International Association of Insurance Supervisors) have also started some initiatives with regards to the regulatory approach to ERM. Rating agencies are developing their criteria for ERM and ECM. Meanwhile ERM as practiced in the banking sector is often suggested as a model for ERM in the insurance sector. What does this all mean to the insurance industry?

Questions for discussion include:
• How are stakeholders including insurers, banks, regulators and rating agencies approaching the development of an ERM / ECM framework? What are the similarities/differences?
• How will the various approaches to ERM/ECM affect current capital modelling approaches?
• What is the capacity of the stakeholders to understand and assess a potentially more sophisticated ECM framework?
• Is a regulatory system requiring capital models sufficient and viable?

Economic Capital Models: Design, Calibration, Validation and Updating

US – Advanced Level
UK – Advanced level
AP- Basic Level

This session will focus on the processes associated with designing, calibrating, validating and updating of internal models based on bringing new information and intelligence as they arise.

Questions for discussion include:
• What does best practice look like when designing, calibrating, validating or updating an ECM? How do we assess the limitations of an ECM (e.g. model risk or parameter uncertainty)?
• What are prudent processes that can be used to test models such that they simulate a reasonable approximation of reality?
• What is the tradeoff between model efficiency and model accuracy? What are the available resources to address this?
• What is best practice for integrating an ECM with the strategic planning of an insurance business? Would regulatory requirements for internal models weaken their effectiveness in risk management?

Governance, Strategic Risk and Operational Risk

US – Basic Level
UK – Basic level
AP- Advanced Level

Firms that have poor governance or poor management of strategic and operation risks often experience brand damages, loss of distribution networks, fiscal changes, or inability to fund new business plans, ultimately leading to failures. The main benefit touted in an ERM framework is the notion that ERM takes a holistic view of the risks permeating an entity in the interest of balancing risk and return tradeoffs in making strategic decisions such as capital allocation to add value to an enterprise. Yet ERM frameworks often do not adequately capture the governance, strategic or operational risks that businesses face.

This session will consider issues such as ERM governance, tools and techniques to assess strategic and operational risks and their integration into an overall ERM framework. In addition, the Asia Region session will provide in-depth discussions of ERM in the pension industry.

これらの内容は、国際関係委員会のERM Webinar部会で報告するとともに、本日12月15日のERM委員会でも報告させていただいた。金融危機を経て、各国の監督制度はリスク管理について、より厳格になってきており、全般的に、欧米の各社はより先進的な内部モデルの構築に取り組んでいるという印象をうけた。

2009年12月5日土曜日

IAA会議でインドのハイデラバッドに出張する


IAA会議というのは、春と秋の年二回世界中で国を変えて開催されるが、今回はインドの南部の都市Hyderabadという人口8百万人位の都市で開催された。私も、IACAの議長として、日本アクチュアリー会から派遣されて、11月11日に出発して、17日に無事に帰国した。治安が悪く、衛生環境もまだまだという話を聞いていたので、相当用心して行ったが、何人かの方は空港で白タクにやられたようで、私も水にあたったようで、帰国後一週間ほどお腹の調子が悪かった。大勢の参加者は、会議そのものに塩漬けで、安全で一流の設備を持つ、会議開催ホテルのマリオットホテルから一歩も出なかった人も多いようであった。現地の風景は、添付の写真のようであるが、まさにdeveloping countryという名に相応しく、車と人の多さと排気ガスの大量のスモッグ、そして横断歩道の無いなかで警笛を鳴らしながら暴走する黄色い三輪の車やオートバイ、それに乗っかっている定員オーバーの男女を問わない人の数・・・は、衝撃的である。ただ、やはり日本と違って確実に経済の成長の勢いを感じさせられた。このままいけば、日本は、中国に抜かれそしてインドにも抜かれていくだろうという危機感を誰もが感じたであろう。
さて、会議そのもでであるが、私はIACAの議長ということもあって、Section Chairs Meeting, Member Serviuce Committeee, Executive Committeeなど、IAAのガバナンスに関する議論をする委員会にも参加を要請されていた。特に、Section Chairs Meetingでは、LIFE Sectionの議長で今回の議長を予定していたKurt Wolfsdorfが欠席したので、次の輪番で私が議長を務めるはめになった。議案は、以下の内容であった。
1. ASTIN Bulletin
a) Management Board (update from Harry Panjer)
b) Costs * (update from Christian Levac)
2. Colloquia
a) Report any significant items of interest from colloquia held this year (all)
b) Report on future locations (all)
3. Section Dues/Membership (all)
4. Secretariat (IT) Costs (Secretariat)
まあ、つたない私の英語で恥ずかしい限りであるが、ASTINのハリー・パンジャーなどの著名なアクチュアリーばかりのなかで、司会をさせてもらった。
私のIACA委員会自体は、15日の10:45分から12:15分までの90分で、次の議案を審議した。
IACA Committee Agenda

I. Secretary’s Report Morten Harbitz

A. Approve minutes of 30 September 2009 conference call
B. Approve minutes of 9 October 2009 conference call

II. Treasurer’s Report Morten Harbitz

A. Proposal from IAA Regarding Costs and Computer –
   Discussion by Mike Toothman and Nick Dumbreck
B. 2009 to Date
C. Officer Expense Reimbursement Policy
D. ICA- IACA Funded Bursary allocation

III. Executive Director’s Report Margaret Sherwood

A. Brief Update on US Profession
B. Geoffrey Heywood Young Consultants Award Task Force
C. Max Lander Award in 2010
D. Nominating Committee – Discussion by Hideyuki Yoshida
E. Committee Attendance Record
F. Bylaws
G. Policies and Procedures Manual
H. Colloquium Attendance and Cost History

IV. IAA Governance and Strategic Plan – Update Nick Dumbreck

V. Function Committees’ Reports – Membership, Terms of Reference, and Action Plans

A. Professionalism Committee Emmanuel Tassin
B. Publications and Research Joint Committee Andrew Vaughan
C. Membership Services Development Committee Liyaquat Khan
D. Global Development Committee Hideyuki Yoshida

VI. Convention Function Committee Nick Salter, Chair

A. 5-7 October 2009 - PBSS – Tokyo Ken Buffin
B. 12-15 October 2009 - EAAC – Korea Grace Jiang &
Bozenna Hinton
C. 1-4 November 2009 - CCA - Tucson, Arizona Ken Hohman
D. 4 February 2010 – IACA/ACA – Gatwick, England Nick Salter
E. 14-17, Oct. 2012 – IACA/IAAHS/PBSS JointColloq – New Delhi, India Liyaquat Khan

VII. 2010 Biennial Meeting - 7-12 March with ICA Meeting - South Africa Mike Codron

VIII. Next Biennial Meetings Hideyuki Yoshida

A. y2012 – 14-17 October - With PBSS and IAAHS New Delhi, India ? Liyaquat Khan
B. 2014 - 30 March - 4 April with ICA meeting - Washington, DC, USA
   not yet assigned
C. 2016 – Europe-Spain? Probably with PBSS and IAAHS not yet assigned
D. 2018 – Sydney? Berlin? With ICA meeting not yet assigned

IX. Other Business Hideyuki Yoshida

あっというまに時間がたってしまい、ケープタウンの件は、次回の電話会議で審議することとした。問題なのは、2012年に予定しているインドでのIACA/PBSS.IAAHSのJoint Colloquiaについてである。まず、伏線として、Section Chairs meetingの場で、IAAの前会長の、デイヴィッド・ハートマンから、治安、物価その他もろもろの理由で、予定していたニューデリーでの開催に反対という強いメッセージが出されていた。その一方で、1年以上も前から、相当に周到な準備がIACAの現地の委員会で進んでいたのも事実である。しかしながらこの委員会と、インドのアクチュアリー会との協力体制についての公式見解が得られておらず、直前にインドのアクチュアリー会の会長のアガルワル氏と話もしたが、引き続き12:30から開催する昼食会で関係者全員の意見を聞くこととした。ただ、肝心の昼食会は、招待したにもかかわらずインドの代表がだれも出席せずに、PBSSの議長、IAAHSの議長、それにIAAの新会長、ポールソーントン、これにIAAの事務局長のYves Guerardも出席して、インドでの開催の妥当性も含めて、組織運営計画自体を見直すこととなった。というわけで、このような、政治的調整の宿題を持ち帰ることになった。できれば、クリスマスまでに電話会議を開催して、方向性を定めて行きたいと思う。会計委員会や、保険監督委員会にも出席させていただいたが、これらの委員会はテクニカル・マッターを審議する大変専門的な委員会である。いうまでもなく、保険IFRSや、欧州のSolvencyIIの動向などが中心のテーマである。各国から派遣されている委員は、ほとんどこのテーマを専属で研究したいる方々であろうと思う。監査法人やコンサルティング会社でもクライエント・ワークをやらずに研究に専念している人が多いとのことである。

2009年11月8日日曜日

日本アクチュアリー会年次大会でパネル発表


既にこのブログでも案内済みであったが、平成21年11月5日(木)・6日(金)と日本アクチュアリー会の年次大会が、経団連会館と東京ステーションコンフェレンスで成功裏に開催された。私が国際関係委員会委員長としてオーガナイザーを務めたセッションは、二日目の11月6日の9:30から11:45まで第2会場の503会議室で開催された。プログラムには、次の通り記載されている。

パネルディスカッション(9:30~11:45)
国際関係委員会「The Day after Tomorrow for Insurers」
オーガナイザー あらた監査法人 吉田 英幸 君
パネリスト PWC Bryan Joseph 氏
ミューニック・リー Gavin Maistry 氏
ミリマンインク 猪野 力弥 君
ハノーバー・リー 野上 憲一 君
要旨】
米国のモーゲージ・ファイナンス市場の片隅から発した世界金融危機は、グローバル金融システム全体の基盤を脅かすに至った。その影響は、保険・年金業界を含むすべての業界に及び、アクチュアリーの将来の業務にも大きな変化をもたらすであろう。「The Day After Tomorrow for Insurers」のパネルでは、(1)規制、リスク・マネジメントと財務報告、(2)資本の配分と活用(モデルの開発と限界)、(3)この金融危機の勝利者は、どのような組織か、また、西洋から東洋への経済的・政治的パワーシフトが世界経済にどのような影響を与えるかにつき、海外のアクチュアリー2名から基調講演いただき、その後に国際関係委員会のMCEV部会、ERM部会、及び商品開発部会からアクチュアリーの技術的視点での影響分析と将来予測を議論する


実際の発表の順番は、外人については通訳をつけて、まずBryan Joseph 氏が、The Day after Tomorrow for Insurersの発表をした。内容は、今回の金融危機の発生の原点に立ち返り、銀行・保険業界の受けたインパクトの大きさ、規制の強化の方向性、そして保険に関するアクチュアリーのモデルの限界を理解する必要性、そして、最期に、G8からG20へのパワーシフト、あるいは西欧からイーストへの経済的・政治的パワーシフトが起こったことの今後の世界マクロ経済への影響の重要性的の話をいただいた。政権交代が起こった日本の今後の世界のパワーバランスの変化の中での舵取りにも大変重要な意味をもつことかと思われる。また、気候変動の影響、危険と機会の分析にも言及し、世界は複雑興味深い時代に入りアクチュアリーは引き続き革新的にフィナンシャルな側面を中心に重要な役割を果たしていけるであろうと締めくくった。2番目のスピーカーの、Gavin Maistry 氏は、「金融危機後のリスク管理」について、Munich Re社の例を使って説明いただいた。世界でトップクラスにあるミュンヘン再保険会社のケーススタディを大変興味深く伺うことができた。これから言えることは、過去の危機(2002年-2003年)を契機としたリスクマネジメントに対する取り組みが今般の金融危機に生かされたということではないかと思える。外人の後は、三つの委員会の部会からの発表で、まずはフィナンシャル・レポーティング部会から猪野 力弥さんが、MCEVの最新の状況を発表いただいた。MCEV原則はEVの比較可能性を高めることを一つの重要な目的として導入されたが、金融危機の影響によりEV開示会社はそれぞれ異なる前提を使用するようになり、EV原則はその修正を余儀なくされた。2009年10月にMCEV原則の改訂版が公表されたが、これで十分なものとは言い難く、今後も継続して検討すべき課題が多いようである。また、検討中のソルベンシーⅡやIFRSとの整合性も今後の大きな課題である。その次に、ERM Webinar部会を代表して、私のほうから昨年の12月に実施された、世界同時中継のERMのインターネット・ウェブセミナーの内容を、アジア・パシフィック、アメリカ、ヨーロッパの三つのリージョンにつき、それぞれ、1.Market-Consistent Risk Management、2.Does ERM Need an Economic Capital Model、3. The Pros and Cons of Economic Capital Models vs. Stress Testingとして、9つのコマで要旨を説明した。金融危機との関係に言及したものは、以外に少なかったようであるが、例えばShuen Liuのペーパーが参考になると思う。すべての発表の全訳は、年度末には会報別冊に出版の予定であるので、是非、そちらを参考にしていただければと思う。今年も同様な企画を12月1日に予定している。最後に商品部会のリーダーの野上 憲一 さんから「金融危機による生命保険商品への影響」についてお話をいただいた。中国、米国の最新状況をはじめ、独自の視点での報告をいただき興味深かった。今回の金融危機は100年に一度の特殊なケースと捉えるか、あるいは今後も起こりうると捉えるかで、商品面の対応が180度異なってくるように思えると示唆されたが、その意味で、考えさせる報告ではなかったかと思う。
いずれの発表のスライドもアクチュアリー会の大会専用のホームページにアップロードされているので、興味のある方は、是非、ダウンロードして読まれることをお勧めする。それにしても、大会期間は営業回りもあり、非常に忙しかった。今週は11月11日からIAAのHyderabad会議で出張なので、頭をそちらに切り替えて準備を進めている・

2009年10月22日木曜日

What is Japan's East Asia Community idea all about?


東南アジアコンサルティング協会(APACA; Asia Pacific Association of Consulting Actuaries)は、無事に15th EAAC ConferenceのIACA Trackで進発し、現在委員会の名簿を固めているところである。今後の、中国・インド等の市場の経済的・政治的パワーシフトを予見しての動きである。
この動きについて、委員の一人から、ロイターの記事にのった鳩山政権の動きとの類似性をコメントした人がいるので、記事を紹介する。
ところで、まったく別件であるが、昨晩、CFO FORUMが、MCEVの改訂のニュース・リリースを出しているので、アクチュアリーの皆さんはホームページを参照されたい。


(以下引用)
This Reuters article about Japan's East Asian initiative makes an interesting parallel to our EAAC/APACA initiative.


Q+A-What is Japan's East Asia Community idea all about?
Thu Oct 22 09:05:59 UTC 2009

By Yoko Nishikawa
TOKYO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama is expected to pitch his idea of an East Asian Community, inspired by the example of the European Union, when he meets his Asian counterparts this weekend.
Asian leaders will gather in Thailand for the "East Asia Summit", bringing together the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand. [ID:nBKK469502] [ID:nBKK491744]
WHY IS JAPAN PUSHING THE IDEA NOW?
Hatoyama, who took office last month after a landslide election victory, wants to put greater emphasis on Japan's ties with Asia while steering a diplomatic course more independent of the United States, Japan's most important security ally.
As its economic might declines as the population ages, Japan needs Asia's growing economic power for future growth.
Some analysts say Tokyo wants to draw China into regional arrangements as it fears losing its first-class status in the region amid talk of a "G2" arrangement under which Washington and Beijing shape the global economy. Economists expect China to replace Japan as the world's No.2 economy, possibly next year.
WHY DOES IT MATTER?
Intra-regional trade among member states of the East Asia Summit has grown three-fold over the past decade and accounts for 54 percent of their total trade, higher than that of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
The GDP of East Asia Summit members combined now accounts for around 23 percent of the world's total output.
In addition to increasing economic interdependence, Asia has many issues to tackle together, including the financial crisis, outbreaks of H1N1 flu, climate change and natural disasters.
IS THE IDEA NEW?
Not really. The idea of a regional Asian grouping is the brainchild of former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad, who proposed an East Asian Economic Caucus in 1990 -- a notion that some pundits called the caucus without the Caucasians.
Japan's push to create a home-grown Asian Monetary Fund to help troubled Asian economies in 1997 was quashed by the United States, just like Mahathir's EAEC proposal.
The East Asia Summit started in 2005, building on leaders' meetings held since 1997 by ASEAN plus China, Japan and South Korea. But the group is struggling to forge a strong identity.
WHO WILL BE INVOLVED IN THE EAST ASIA COMMUNITY?
Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada has envisaged opening membership to Japan, China, South Korea, ASEAN, Australia, New Zealand, and India -- the same members as the East Asia Summit.
But he has recently toned down his comments, saying there is no immediate need for concrete details, and has tried to soothe worries in Washington about the United States being excluded.
WILL IT EVER FLY?
Critics say the regional concept is pie-in-the-sky, but some argue that with Japan's new push, the idea could gain momentum.
Tokyo acknowledges that it will take decades to boost political integration and create a common currency in a politically, culturally and economically diverse region.
Japan hopes to first deepen economic ties and then take a step-by-step approach to boosting cooperation in other areas such as the environment, energy and influenza. It says sharing a common vision for the regional community will help Asia overcome friction more easily. But Japan's Okada has said it is hard at the moment to envisage a security agreement like NATO in Asia.
To make it viable, Tokyo needs to build trust with Beijing, given China's bitter memories of Japan's wartime occupation, the economic competition between the two and mutual mistrust over their militaries.
Rivalry over who would take the leading role as well as how to define the U.S. role in the scheme could become hurdles.
Washington has been wary about fresh talk on Asia's regional bloc, but Tokyo says it is a long-term vision and the U.S.-Japan alliance remains the foundation of Japan's diplomacy.
ANY IMPACT ON DOLLAR'S ROLE AS KEY CURRENCY?
Hatoyama has said his vision for an East Asian Community with a future goal of creating a common currency was not meant to diminish the role of the dollar, but market concerns linger.
The idea has always been touchy within Asia. Asian finance ministers a few years ago studied ways to create regional currency units as indicators to better monitor their currency movements, but the debate stirred controversy in some countries.

This service is not intended to encourage spam. The details provided by your colleague have been used for the sole purpose of facilitating this email communication and have not been retained by Thomson Reuters. Your personal details have not been added to any database or mailing list.
If you would like to receive news articles delivered to your email address, please subscribe at www.reuters.com/newsmails
© Copyright Thomson Reuters 2009 All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.
Quotes and other data are provided for your personal information only, and are not intended for trading purposes. Thomson Reuters and its data providers shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the quotes or other data, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

2009年10月18日日曜日

秋はアクチュアリーの国際会議のオンパレード


先週の10月12日から15日まで、韓国のソウルで東アジアアクチュアリー大会(15th EAAC; East Asian Actuarial Conference)が開催されたが、IACAの会長として出席し、14日のIACA Sessionで、IACAの紹介と活動状況について、プレゼンを行った。リンクは次のとおりである。
http://www.eaac15th.org/sub1-1.asp
また、「アジアにおけるMCEV」と題して、中国のPwCのアクチュアリーと共同でプレゼンを行った。大変盛況で、部屋は満杯で、後ろで立ち見の人が多数おられた。また、その後のランチセッションでは、予定どおりにアジア地域のコンサルティング協会(APACA; Asia Pacific Association of Consulting Actuaries)の創設集会を行い、私が構想を説明し、後に三名の会場参加者からの賛同のコメントスピーチをいただいた。これで、APACAは、実際にactivationされたことになり、アジアにおけるコンサルティングアクチュアリーの発展と市場の拡大、品質・リスク管理等の機能を果たしていくことになる。当面は、全世界をカバーするIACAのブランチとの位置づけにするが、将来的には、英国のACA、米国のCCAのように独立した基盤を持たせることも視野に入ってくる。EAACの会場には、多数の日本人や海外の知人が参加しておられ、やはりFace to Faceで会って議論することの重要性を改めて感じた。ネットワーキングの基本は、お互いを知り合うことがまずは大切と思う。また、スピード感も、会って話せば、随分と効率よく意思決定していくことができる。実際、2012年秋に企画しているインドのニューデリーでの、IACA/PBSS/IAAHSの3SectionのJoint Collloquiaについては、財政的な収支が鍵であるが、インドの現地の委員会の作成した、Financial Projectionの感応度テストを7つのシナリオで吟味したが、大丈夫との感触を得た。まずは、23日までにIACA Committee全員の承認をとり、私の名前で、インドのアクチュアリー会会長に協力の要請を出す予定である。PBSSとIAAHSの両会長も基本的に賛同を得られた模様である。
また、EAACの直前の週の10月5日6日は、年金数理人会の20周年を記念して、PBSSの大会が、都市センターホテルで開催されたが、私もIACAの会長として招待され、IACAの紹介と活動状況について、プレゼンをさせていただいた。他に2名のIACAのメンバーからのプレゼンも会った。こちらも、立派なプログラムが組まれており、組織委員会、プログラム委員会の皆さんに敬意を表したい。

2009年9月27日日曜日

G-20 statement from the Pittsburgh meeting


ピッツバーグで開催されたG-20のTextを入手したので、参考に引用する。鳩山総理は、G-8の存続を主張したようだが、徐々に経済的・政治的ポリティクスは、Developing countriesが発言力を増していきそうである。アクチュアリーの関与する保険・年金市場にも影響してくるものと思われる。

Here is the text of the G-20 statement from the Pittsburgh meeting.

1. We assessed the progress we have made together in addressing the global crisis and agreed to maintain our steps to support economic activity until recovery is assured. We further committed to additional steps to ensure strong, sustainable, and balanced growth, to build a stronger international financial system, to reduce development imbalances, and to modernize our architecture for international economic cooperation.

A Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth

2. The growth of the global economy and the success of our coordinated effort to respond to the recent crisis have increased the case for more sustained and systematic international cooperation. In the short-run, we must continue to implement our stimulus programs to support economic activity until recovery clearly has taken hold. We also need to develop a transparent and credible process for withdrawing our extraordinary fiscal, monetary and financial sector support, to be implemented when recovery becomes fully secured. We task our Finance Ministers, working with input from the IMF and FSB, at their November meeting to continue developing cooperative and coordinated exit strategies recognizing that the scale, timing, and sequencing of this process will vary across countries or regions and across the type of policy measures. Credible exit strategies should be designed and communicated clearly to anchor expectations and reinforce confidence.

3. The IMF estimates that world growth will resume this year and rise by nearly 3% by the end of 2010. Subsequently, our objective is to return the world to high, sustainable, and balanced growth, while maintaining our commitment to fiscal responsibility and sustainability, with reforms to increase our growth potential and capacity to generate jobs and policies designed to avoid both the re-creation of asset bubbles and the re-emergence of unsustainable global financial flows. We commit to put in place the necessary policy measures to achieve these outcomes.

4. We will need to work together as we manage the transition to a more balanced pattern of global growth. The crisis and our initial policy responses have already produced significant shifts in the pattern and level of growth across countries. Many countries have already taken important steps to expand domestic demand, bolstering global activity and reducing imbalances. In some countries, the rise in private saving now underway will, in time, need to be augmented by a rise in public saving. Ensuring a strong recovery will necessitate adjustments across different parts of the global economy, while requiring macroeconomic policies that promote adequate and balanced global demand as well as decisive progress on structural reforms that foster private domestic demand, narrow the global development gap, and strengthen long-run growth potential. The IMF estimates that only with such adjustments and realignments, will global growth reach a strong, sustainable, and balanced pattern. While governments have started moving in the right direction, a shared understanding and deepened dialogue will help build a more stable, lasting, and sustainable pattern of growth. Raising living standards in the emerging markets and developing countries is also a critical element in achieving sustainable growth in the global economy.

5. Today we are launching a Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth. To put in place this framework, we commit to develop a process whereby we set out our objectives, put forward policies to achieve these objectives, and together assess our progress. We will ask the IMF to help us with its analysis of how our respective national or regional policy frameworks fit together. We will ask the World Bank to advise us on progress in promoting development and poverty reduction as part of the rebalancing of global growth. We will work together to ensure that our fiscal, monetary, trade, and structural policies are collectively consistent with more sustainable and balanced trajectories of growth. We will undertake macro prudential and regulatory policies to help prevent credit and asset price cycles from becoming forces of destabilization. As we commit to implement a new, sustainable growth model, we should encourage work on measurement methods so as to better take into account the social and environmental dimensions of economic development.

6. We call on our Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors to launch the new Framework by November by initiating a cooperative process of mutual assessment of our policy frameworks and the implications of those frameworks for the pattern and sustainability of global growth. We believe that regular consultations, strengthened cooperation on macroeconomic policies, the exchange of experiences on structural policies, and ongoing assessment will promote the adoption of sound policies and secure a healthy global economy. Our compact is that:

G-20 members will agree on shared policy objectives. These objectives should be updated as conditions evolve.
G-20 members will set out our medium-term policy frameworks and will work together to assess the collective implications of our national policy frameworks for the level and pattern of global growth and to identify potential risks to financial stability.
G-20 Leaders will consider, based on the results of the mutual assessment, and agree any actions to meet our common objectives.
7. This process will only be successful if it is supported by candid, even-handed, and balanced analysis of our policies. We ask the IMF to assist our Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in this process of mutual assessment by developing a forward-looking analysis of whether policies pursued by individual G-20 countries are collectively consistent with more sustainable and balanced trajectories for the global economy, and to report regularly to both the G-20 and the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC), building on the IMF’s existing bilateral and multilateral surveillance analysis, on global economic developments, patterns of growth and suggested policy adjustments. Our Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors will elaborate this process at their November meeting and we will review the results of the first mutual assessment at our next summit.

8. These policies will help us to meet our responsibility to the community of nations to build a more resilient international financial system and to reduce development imbalances.

9. Building on Chancellor Merkel’s proposed Charter, on which we will continue to work, we adopted today Core Values for Sustainable Economic Activity, which will include those of propriety, integrity, and transparency, and which will underpin the Framework.

Strengthening the International Financial Regulatory System

10. Major failures of regulation and supervision, plus reckless and irresponsible risk taking by banks and other financial institutions, created dangerous financial fragilities that contributed significantly to the current crisis. A return to the excessive risk taking prevalent in some countries before the crisis is not an option.

11. Since the onset of the global crisis, we have developed and begun implementing sweeping reforms to tackle the root causes of the crisis and transform the system for global financial regulation. Substantial progress has been made in strengthening prudential oversight, improving risk management, strengthening transparency, promoting market integrity, establishing supervisory colleges, and reinforcing international cooperation. We have enhanced and expanded the scope of regulation and oversight, with tougher regulation of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives, securitization markets, credit rating agencies, and hedge funds. We endorse the institutional strengthening of the FSB through its Charter, following its establishment in London, and welcome its reports to Leaders and Ministers. The FSB’s ongoing efforts to monitor progress will be essential to the full and consistent implementation of needed reforms. We call on the FSB to report on progress to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors in advance of the next Leaders summit.

12. Yet our work is not done. Far more needs to be done to protect consumers, depositors, and investors against abusive market practices, promote high quality standards, and help ensure the world does not face a crisis of the scope we have seen. We are committed to take action at the national and international level to raise standards together so that our national authorities implement global standards consistently in a way that ensures a level playing field and avoids fragmentation of markets, protectionism, and regulatory arbitrage. Our efforts to deal with impaired assets and to encourage the raising of additional capital must continue, where needed. We commit to conduct robust, transparent stress tests as needed. We call on banks to retain a greater proportion of current profits to build capital, where needed, to support lending. Securitization sponsors or originators should retain a part of the risk of the underlying assets, thus encouraging them to act prudently. It is important to ensure an adequate balance between macroprudential and microprudential regulation to control risks, and to develop the tools necessary to monitor and assess the buildup of macroprudential risks in the financial system. In addition, we have agreed to improve the regulation, functioning, and transparency of financial and commodity markets to address excessive commodity price volatility.

13. As we encourage the resumption of lending to households and businesses, we must take care not to spur a return of the practices that led to the crisis. The steps we are taking here, when fully implemented, will result in a fundamentally stronger financial system than existed prior to the crisis. If we all act together, financial institutions will have stricter rules for risk-taking, governance that aligns compensation with long-term performance, and greater transparency in their operations. All firms whose failure could pose a risk to financial stability must be subject to consistent, consolidated supervision and regulation with high standards. Our reform is multi-faceted but at its core must be stronger capital standards, complemented by clear incentives to mitigate excessive risk-taking practices. Capital allows banks to withstand those losses that inevitably will come. It, together with more powerful tools for governments to wind down firms that fail, helps us hold firms accountable for the risks that they take. Building on their Declaration on Further Steps to Strengthen the International Financial System, we call on our Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors to reach agreement on an international framework of reform in the following critical areas:
Building high quality capital and mitigating pro-cyclicality: We commit to developing by end-2010 internationally agreed rules to improve both the quantity and quality of bank capital and to discourage excessive leverage. These rules will be phased in as financial conditions improve and economic recovery is assured, with the aim of implementation by end-2012. The national implementation of higher level and better quality capital requirements, counter-cyclical capital buffers, higher capital requirements for risky products and off-balance sheet activities, as elements of the Basel II Capital Framework, together with strengthened liquidity risk requirements and forward-looking provisioning, will reduce incentives for banks to take excessive risks and create a financial system better prepared to withstand adverse shocks. We welcome the key measures recently agreed by the oversight body of the Basel Committee to strengthen the supervision and regulation of the banking sector. We support the introduction of a leverage ratio as a supplementary measure to the Basel II risk-based framework with a view to migrating to a Pillar 1 treatment based on appropriate review and calibration. To ensure comparability, the details of the leverage ratio will be harmonized internationally, fully adjusting for differences in accounting. All major G-20 financial centers commit to have adopted the Basel II Capital Framework by 2011.
Reforming compensation practices to support financial stability: Excessive compensation in the financial sector has both reflected and encouraged excessive risk taking. Reforming compensation policies and practices is an essential part of our effort to increase financial stability. We fully endorse the implementation standards of the FSB aimed at aligning compensation with long-term value creation, not excessive risk-taking, including by (i) avoiding multi-year guaranteed bonuses; (ii) requiring a significant portion of variable compensation to be deferred, tied to performance and subject to appropriate clawback and to be vested in the form of stock or stock-like instruments, as long as these create incentives aligned with long-term value creation and the time horizon of risk; (iii) ensuring that compensation for senior executives and other employees having a material impact on the firm’s risk exposure align with performance and risk; (iv) making firms’ compensation policies and structures transparent through disclosure requirements; (v) limiting variable compensation as a percentage of total net revenues when it is inconsistent with the maintenance of a sound capital base; and (vi) ensuring that compensation committees overseeing compensation policies are able to act independently. Supervisors should have the responsibility to review firms’ compensation policies and structures with institutional and systemic risk in mind and, if necessary to offset additional risks, apply corrective measures, such as higher capital requirements, to those firms that fail to implement sound compensation policies and practices. Supervisors should have the ability to modify compensation structures in the case of firms that fail or require extraordinary public intervention. We call on firms to implement these sound compensation practices immediately. We task the FSB to monitor the implementation of FSB standards and propose additional measures as required by March 2010.
Improving over-the-counter derivatives markets: All standardized OTC derivative contracts should be traded on exchanges or electronic trading platforms, where appropriate, and cleared through central counterparties by end-2012 at the latest. OTC derivative contracts should be reported to trade repositories. Non-centrally cleared contracts should be subject to higher capital requirements. We ask the FSB and its relevant members to assess regularly implementation and whether it is sufficient to improve transparency in the derivatives markets, mitigate systemic risk, and protect against market abuse.
Addressing cross-border resolutions and systemically important financial institutions by end-2010: Systemically important financial firms should develop internationally-consistent firm-specific contingency and resolution plans. Our authorities should establish crisis management groups for the major cross-border firms and a legal framework for crisis intervention as well as improve information sharing in times of stress. We should develop resolution tools and frameworks for the effective resolution of financial groups to help mitigate the disruption of financial institution failures and reduce moral hazard in the future. Our prudential standards for systemically important institutions should be commensurate with the costs of their failure. The FSB should propose by the end of October 2010 possible measures including more intensive supervision and specific additional capital, liquidity, and other prudential requirements.
14. We call on our international accounting bodies to redouble their efforts to achieve a single set of high quality, global accounting standards within the context of their independent standard setting process, and complete their convergence project by June 2011. The International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) institutional framework should further enhance the involvement of various stakeholders.

15. Our commitment to fight non-cooperative jurisdictions (NCJs) has produced impressive results. We are committed to maintain the momentum in dealing with tax havens, money laundering, proceeds of corruption, terrorist financing, and prudential standards. We welcome the expansion of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information, including the participation of developing countries, and welcome the agreement to deliver an effective program of peer review. The main focus of the Forum’s work will be to improve tax transparency and exchange of information so that countries can fully enforce their tax laws to protect their tax base. We stand ready to use countermeasures against tax havens from March 2010. We welcome the progress made by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing and call upon the FATF to issue a public list of high risk jurisdictions by February 2010. We call on the FSB to report progress to address NCJs with regards to international cooperation and information exchange in November 2009 and to initiate a peer review process by February 2010.

16. We task the IMF to prepare a report for our next meeting with regard to the range of options countries have adopted or are considering as to how the financial sector could make a fair and substantial contribution toward paying for any burdens associated with government interventions to repair the banking system.

Modernizing our Global Institutions to Reflect Today’s Global Economy

17. Modernizing the international financial institutions and global development architecture is essential to our efforts to promote global financial stability, foster sustainable development, and lift the lives of the poorest. We warmly welcome Prime Minister Brown’s report on his review of the responsiveness and adaptability of the international financial institutions (IFIs) and ask our Finance Ministers to consider its conclusions.

Reforming the Mandate, Mission and Governance of the IMF

18. Our commitment to increase the funds available to the IMF allowed it to stem the spread of the crisis to emerging markets and developing countries. This commitment and the innovative steps the IMF has taken to create the facilities needed for its resources to be used efficiently and flexibly have reduced global risks. Capital again is flowing to emerging economies.

19. We have delivered on our promise to treble the resources available to the IMF. We are contributing over $500 billion to a renewed and expanded IMF New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB). The IMF has made Special Drawing Rights (SDR) allocations of $283 billion in total, more than $100 billion of which will supplement emerging market and developing countries’ existing reserve assets. Resources from the agreed sale of IMF gold, consistent with the IMF’s new income model, and funds from internal and other sources will more than double the Fund’s medium-term concessional lending capacity.

20. Our collective response to the crisis has highlighted both the benefits of international cooperation and the need for a more legitimate and effective IMF. The Fund must play a critical role in promoting global financial stability and rebalancing growth. We welcome the reform of IMF’s lending facilities, including the creation of the innovative Flexible Credit Line. The IMF should continue to strengthen its capacity to help its members cope with financial volatility, reducing the economic disruption from sudden swings in capital flows and the perceived need for excessive reserve accumulation. As recovery takes hold, we will work together to strengthen the Fund’s ability to provide even-handed, candid and independent surveillance of the risks facing the global economy and the international financial system. We ask the IMF to support our effort under the Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth through its surveillance of our countries’ policy frameworks and their collective implications for financial stability and the level and pattern of global growth.

21. Modernizing the IMF’s governance is a core element of our effort to improve the IMF’s credibility, legitimacy, and effectiveness. We recognize that the IMF should remain a quota-based organization and that the distribution of quotas should reflect the relative weights of its members in the world economy, which have changed substantially in view of the strong growth in dynamic emerging market and developing countries. To this end, we are committed to a shift in quota share to dynamic emerging market and developing countries of at least five percent from over-represented to under-represented countries using the current IMF quota formula as the basis to work from. We are also committed to protecting the voting share of the poorest in the IMF. On this basis and as part of the IMF’s quota review, to be completed by January 2011, we urge an acceleration of work toward bringing the review to a successful conclusion. As part of that review, we agree that a number of other critical issues will need to be addressed, including: the size of any increase in IMF quotas, which will have a bearing on the ability to facilitate change in quota shares; the size and composition of the Executive Board; ways of enhancing the Board’s effectiveness; and the Fund Governors’ involvement in the strategic oversight of the IMF. Staff diversity should be enhanced. As part of a comprehensive reform package, we agree that the heads and senior leadership of all international institutions should be appointed through an open, transparent and merit-based process. We must urgently implement the package of IMF quota and voice reforms agreed in April 2008.

Reforming the Mission, Mandate and Governance of Our Development banks

22. The Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) responded to our April call to accelerate and expand lending to mitigate the impact of the crisis on the world’s poorest with streamlined facilities, new tools and facilities, and a rapid increase in their lending. They are on track to deliver the promised $100 billion in additional lending. We welcome and encourage the MDBs to continue making full use of their balance sheets. We also welcome additional measures such as the temporary use of callable capital contributions from a select group of donors as was done at the InterAmerican Development Bank (IaDB). Our Finance Ministers should consider how mechanisms such as temporary callable and contingent capital could be used in the future to increase MDB lending at times of crisis. We reaffirm our commitment to ensure that the Multilateral Development Banks and their concessional lending facilities, especially the International Development Agency (IDA) and the African Development Fund, are appropriately funded.

23. Even as we work to mitigate the impact of the crisis, we must strengthen and reform the global development architecture for responding to the world’s long-term challenges.

24. We agree that development and reducing global poverty are central to the development banks’ core mission. The World Bank and other multilateral development banks are also critical to our ability to act together to address challenges, such as climate change and food security, which are global in nature and require globally coordinated action. The World Bank, working with the regional development banks and other international organizations, should strengthen:
its focus on food security through enhancements in agricultural productivity and access to technology, and improving access to food, in close cooperation with relevant specialized agencies;
its focus on human development and security in the poorest and most challenging environments;
support for private-sector led growth and infrastructure to enhance opportunities for the poorest, social and economic inclusion, and economic growth; and
contributions to financing the transition to a green economy through investment in sustainable clean energy generation and use, energy efficiency and climate resilience; this includes responding to countries needs to integrate climate change concerns into their core development strategies, improved domestic policies, and to access new sources of climate finance.
25. To enhance their effectiveness, the World Bank and the regional development banks should strengthen their coordination, when appropriate, with other bilateral and multilateral institutions. They should also strengthen recipient country ownership of strategies and programs and allow adequate policy space.

26. We will help ensure the World Bank and the regional development banks have sufficient resources to fulfill these four challenges and their development mandate, including through a review of their general capital increase needs to be completed by the first half of 2010. Additional resources must be joined to key institutional reforms to ensure effectiveness: greater coordination and a clearer division of labor; an increased commitment to transparency, accountability, and good corporate governance; an increased capacity to innovate and achieve demonstrable results; and greater attention to the needs of the poorest populations.

27. We commit to pursue governance and operational effectiveness reform in conjunction with voting reform to ensure that the World Bank is relevant, effective, and legitimate. We stress the importance of moving towards equitable voting power in the World Bank over time through the adoption of a dynamic formula which primarily reflects countries’ evolving economic weight and the World Bank’s development mission, and that generates in the next shareholding review a significant increase of at least 3% of voting power for developing and transition countries, in addition to the 1.46% increase under the first phase of this important adjustment, to the benefit of under-represented countries. While recognizing that over-represented countries will make a contribution, it will be important to protect the voting power of the smallest poor countries. We recommit to reaching agreement by the 2010 Spring Meetings.

Energy Security and Climate Change

28. Access to diverse, reliable, affordable and clean energy is critical for sustainable growth. Inefficient markets and excessive volatility negatively affect both producers and consumers. Noting the St. Petersburg Principles on Global Energy Security, which recognize the shared interest of energy producing, consuming and transiting countries in promoting global energy security, we individually and collectively commit to:
Increase energy market transparency and market stability by publishing complete, accurate, and timely data on oil production, consumption, refining and stock levels, as appropriate, on a regular basis, ideally monthly, beginning by January 2010. We note the Joint Oil Data Initiative as managed by the International Energy Forum (IEF) and welcome their efforts to examine the expansion of their data collection to natural gas. We will improve our domestic capabilities to collect energy data and improve energy demand and supply forecasting and ask the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to ramp up their efforts to assist interested countries in developing those capabilities. We will strengthen the producer-consumer dialogue to improve our understanding of market fundamentals, including supply and demand trends, and price volatility, and note the work of the IEF experts group.
Improve regulatory oversight of energy markets by implementing the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) recommendations on commodity futures markets and calling on relevant regulators to collect data on large concentrations of trader positions on oil in our national commodities futures markets. We ask our relevant regulators to report back at our next meeting on progress towards implementation. We will direct relevant regulators to also collect related data on over-the-counter oil markets and to take steps to combat market manipulation leading to excessive price volatility. We call for further refinement and improvement of commodity market information, including through the publication of more detailed and disaggregated data, coordinated as far as possible internationally. We ask IOSCO to help national governments design and implement these policies, conduct further analysis including with regard with to excessive volatility, make specific recommendations, and to report regularly on our progress.
29. Enhancing our energy efficiency can play an important, positive role in promoting energy security and fighting climate change. Inefficient fossil fuel subsidies encourage wasteful consumption, distort markets, impede investment in clean energy sources and undermine efforts to deal with climate change. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the IEA have found that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies by 2020 would reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in 2050 by ten percent. Many countries are reducing fossil fuel subsidies while preventing adverse impact on the poorest. Building on these efforts and recognizing the challenges of populations suffering from energy poverty, we commit to:
Rationalize and phase out over the medium term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption. As we do that, we recognize the importance of providing those in need with essential energy services, including through the use of targeted cash transfers and other appropriate mechanisms. This reform will not apply to our support for clean energy, renewables, and technologies that dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We will have our Energy and Finance Ministers, based on their national circumstances, develop implementation strategies and timeframes, and report back to Leaders at the next Summit. We ask the international financial institutions to offer support to countries in this process. We call on all nations to adopt policies that will phase out such subsidies worldwide.
30. We request relevant institutions, such as the IEA, OPEC, OECD, and World Bank, provide an analysis of the scope of energy subsidies and suggestions for the implementation of this initiative and report back at the next summit.

31. Increasing clean and renewable energy supplies, improving energy efficiency, and promoting conservation are critical steps to protect our environment, promote sustainable growth and address the threat of climate change. Accelerated adoption of economically sound clean and renewable energy technology and energy efficiency measures diversifies our energy supplies and strengthens our energy security. We commit to:

Stimulate investment in clean energy, renewables, and energy efficiency and provide financial and technical support for such projects in developing countries.
Take steps to facilitate the diffusion or transfer of clean energy technology including by conducting joint research and building capacity. The reduction or elimination of barriers to trade and investment in this area are being discussed and should be pursued on a voluntary basis and in appropriate fora.
32. As leaders of the world’s major economies, we are working for a resilient, sustainable, and green recovery. We underscore anew our resolve to take strong action to address the threat of dangerous climate change. We reaffirm the objective, provisions, and principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including common but differentiated responsibilities. We note the principles endorsed by Leaders at the Major Economies Forum in L’Aquila, Italy. We will intensify our efforts, in cooperation with other parties, to reach agreement in Copenhagen through the UNFCCC negotiation. An agreement must include mitigation, adaptation, technology, and financing.

33. We welcome the work of the Finance Ministers and direct them to report back at their next meeting with a range of possible options for climate change financing to be provided as a resource to be considered in the UNFCCC negotiations at Copenhagen.

Strengthening Support for the Most Vulnerable

34. Many emerging and developing economies have made great strides in raising living standards as their economies converge toward the productivity levels and living standards of advanced economies. This process was interrupted by the crisis and is still far from complete. The poorest countries have little economic cushion to protect vulnerable populations from calamity, particularly as the financial crisis followed close on the heels of a global spike in food prices. We note with concern the adverse impact of the global crisis on low income countries’ (LICs) capacity to protect critical core spending in areas such as health, education, safety nets, and infrastructure. The UN's new Global Impact Vulnerability Alert System will help our efforts to monitor the impact of the crisis on the most vulnerable. We share a collective responsibility to mitigate the social impact of the crisis and to assure that all parts of the globe participate in the recovery.

35. The MDBs play a key role in the fight against poverty. We recognize the need for accelerated and additional concessional financial support to LICs to cushion the impact of the crisis on the poorest, welcome the increase in MDB lending during the crisis and support the MDBs having the resources needed to avoid a disruption of concessional financing to the most vulnerable countries. The IMF also has increased its concessional lending to LICs during the crisis. Resources from the sale of IMF gold, consistent with the new income model, and funds from internal and other sources will double the Fund’s medium-term concessional lending capacity.

36. Several countries are considering creating, on a voluntary basis, mechanisms that could allow, consistent with their national circumstances, the mobilization of existing SDR resources to support the IMF’s lending to the poorest countries. Even as we work to mitigate the impact of the crisis, we must strengthen and reform the global development architecture for responding to the world’s long-term challenges. We ask our relevant ministers to explore the benefits of a new crisis support facility in IDA to protect LICs from future crises and the enhanced use of financial instruments in protecting the investment plans of middle income countries from interruption in times of crisis, including greater use of guarantees.

37. We reaffirm our historic commitment to meet the Millennium Development Goals and our respective Official Development Assistance (ODA) pledges, including commitments on Aid for Trade, debt relief, and those made at Gleneagles, especially to sub-Saharan Africa, to 2010 and beyond.

38. Even before the crisis, too many still suffered from hunger and poverty and even more people lack access to energy and finance. Recognizing that the crisis has exacerbated this situation, we pledge cooperation to improve access to food, fuel, and finance for the poor.

39. Sustained funding and targeted investments are urgently needed to improve long-term food security. We welcome and support the food security initiative announced in L’Aquila and efforts to further implement the Global Partnership for Agriculture and Food Security and to address excessive price volatility. We call on the World Bank to work with interested donors and organizations to develop a multilateral trust fund to scale-up agricultural assistance to low-income countries. This will help support innovative bilateral and multilateral efforts to improve global nutrition and build sustainable agricultural systems, including programs like those developed through the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program (CAADP). It should be designed to ensure country ownership and rapid disbursement of funds, fully respecting the aid effectiveness principles agreed in Accra, and facilitate the participation of private foundations, businesses, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in this historic effort. These efforts should complement the UN Comprehensive Framework for Agriculture. We ask the World Bank, the African Development Bank, UN, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), World Food Programme (WFP) and other stakeholders to coordinate their efforts, including through country-led mechanisms, in order to complement and reinforce other existing multilateral and bilateral efforts to tackle food insecurity.

40. To increase access to energy, we will promote the deployment of clean, affordable energy resources to the developing world. We commit, on a voluntary basis, to funding programs that achieve this objective, such as the Scaling Up Renewable Energy Program and the Energy for the Poor Initiative, and to increasing and more closely harmonizing our bilateral efforts.

41. We commit to improving access to financial services for the poor. We have agreed to support the safe and sound spread of new modes of financial service delivery capable of reaching the poor and, building on the example of micro finance, will scale up the successful models of small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) financing. Working with the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and other international organizations, we will launch a G-20 Financial Inclusion Experts Group. This group will identify lessons learned on innovative approaches to providing financial services to these groups, promote successful regulatory and policy approaches and elaborate standards on financial access, financial literacy, and consumer protection. We commit to launch a G-20 SME Finance Challenge, a call to the private sector to put forward its best proposals for how public finance can maximize the deployment of private finance on a sustainable and scalable basis.

42. As we increase the flow of capital to developing countries, we also need to prevent its illicit outflow. We will work with the World Bank’s Stolen Assets Recovery (StAR) program to secure the return of stolen assets to developing countries, and support other efforts to stem illicit outflows. We ask the FATF to help detect and deter the proceeds of corruption by prioritizing work to strengthen standards on customer due diligence, beneficial ownership and transparency. We note the principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action and will work to increase the transparency of international aid flows by 2010. We call for the adoption and enforcement of laws against transnational bribery, such as the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, and the ratification by the G-20 of the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the adoption during the third Conference of the Parties in Doha of an effective, transparent, and inclusive mechanism for the review of its implementation. We support voluntary participation in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, which calls for regular public disclosure of payments by extractive industries to governments and reconciliation against recorded receipt of those funds by governments.

Putting Quality Jobs at the Heart of the Recovery

43. The prompt, vigorous and sustained response of our countries has saved or created millions of jobs. Based on International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates, our efforts will have created or saved at least 7 – 11 million jobs by the end of this year. Without sustained action, unemployment is likely to continue rising in many of our countries even after economies stabilize, with a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable segments of our population. As growth returns, every country must act to ensure that employment recovers quickly. We commit to implementing recovery plans that support decent work, help preserve employment, and prioritize job growth. In addition, we will continue to provide income, social protection, and training support for the unemployed and those most at risk of unemployment. We agree that the current challenges do not provide an excuse to disregard or weaken internationally recognized labor standards. To assure that global growth is broadly beneficial, we should implement policies consistent with ILO fundamental principles and rights at work.

44. Our new Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth requires structural reforms to create more inclusive labor markets, active labor market policies, and quality education and training programs. Each of our countries will need, through its own national policies, to strengthen the ability of our workers to adapt to changing market demands and to benefit from innovation and investments in new technologies, clean energy, environment, health, and infrastructure. It is no longer sufficient to train workers to meet their specific current needs; we should ensure access to training programs that support lifelong skills development and focus on future market needs. Developed countries should support developing countries to build and strengthen their capacities in this area. These steps will help to assure that the gains from new inventions and lifting existing impediments to growth are broadly shared.

45. We pledge to support robust training efforts in our growth strategies and investments. We recognize successful employment and training programs are often designed together with employers and workers, and we call on the ILO, in partnership with other organizations, to convene its constituents and NGOs to develop a training strategy for our consideration.

46. We agree on the importance of building an employment-oriented framework for future economic growth. In this context, we reaffirm the importance of the London Jobs Conference and Rome Social Summit. We also welcome the recently-adopted ILO Resolution on Recovering from the Crisis: A Global Jobs Pact, and we commit our nations to adopt key elements of its general framework to advance the social dimension of globalization. The international institutions should consider ILO standards and the goals of the Jobs Pact in their crisis and post-crisis analysis and policy-making activities.

47. To ensure our continued focus on employment policies, the Chair of the Pittsburgh Summit has asked his Secretary of Labor to invite our Employment and Labor Ministers to meet as a group in early 2010 consulting with labor and business and building on the upcoming OECD Labour and Employment Ministerial meeting on the jobs crisis. We direct our Ministers to assess the evolving employment situation, review reports from the ILO and other organizations on the impact of policies we have adopted, report on whether further measures are desirable, and consider medium-term employment and skills development policies, social protection programs, and best practices to ensure workers are prepared to take advantage of advances in science and technology.

An Open Global Economy

48. Continuing the revival in world trade and investment is essential to restoring global growth. It is imperative we stand together to fight against protectionism. We welcome the swift implementation of the $250 billion trade finance initiative. We will keep markets open and free and reaffirm the commitments made in Washington and London: to refrain from raising barriers or imposing new barriers to investment or to trade in goods and services, imposing new export restrictions or implementing World Trade Organization (WTO) inconsistent measures to stimulate exports and commit to rectify such measures as they arise. We will minimize any negative impact on trade and investment of our domestic policy actions, including fiscal policy and action to support the financial sector. We will not retreat into financial protectionism, particularly measures that constrain worldwide capital flows, especially to developing countries. We will notify promptly the WTO of any relevant trade measures. We welcome the latest joint report from the WTO, OECD, IMF, and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and ask them to continue to monitor the situation within their respective mandates, reporting publicly on these commitments on a quarterly basis.

49. We remain committed to further trade liberalization. We are determined to seek an ambitious and balanced conclusion to the Doha Development Round in 2010, consistent with its mandate, based on the progress already made, including with regard to modalities. We understand the need for countries to directly engage with each other, within the WTO bearing in mind the centrality of the multilateral process, in order to evaluate and close the remaining gaps. We note that in order to conclude the negotiations in 2010, closing those gaps should proceed as quickly as possible. We ask our ministers to take stock of the situation no later than early 2010, taking into account the results of the work program agreed to in Geneva following the Delhi Ministerial, and seek progress on Agriculture, Non-Agricultural Market Access, as well as Services, Rules, Trade Facilitation and all other remaining issues. We will remain engaged and review the progress of the negotiations at our next meeting.

The Path from Pittsburgh

50. Today, we designated the G-20 as the premier forum for our international economic cooperation. We have asked our representatives to report back at the next meeting with recommendations on how to maximize the effectiveness of our cooperation. We agreed to have a G-20 Summit in Canada in June 2010, and in Korea in November 2010. We expect to meet annually thereafter, and will meet in France in 2011.

ANNEX: Core Values for Sustainable Economic Activity

1. The economic crisis demonstrates the importance of ushering in a new era of sustainable global economic activity grounded in responsibility. The current crisis has once again confirmed the fundamental recognition that our growth and prosperity are interconnected, and that no region of the globe can wall itself off in a globalized world economy.

2. We, the Leaders of the countries gathered for the Pittsburgh Summit, recognize that concerted action is needed to help our economies get back to stable ground and prosper tomorrow. We commit to taking responsible actions to ensure that every stakeholder – consumers, workers, investors, entrepreneurs – can participate in a balanced, equitable, and inclusive global economy.

3. We share the overarching goal to promote a broader prosperity for our people through balanced growth within and across nations; through coherent economic, social, and environmental strategies; and through robust financial systems and effective international collaboration.

4. We recognize that there are different approaches to economic development and prosperity, and that strategies to achieve these goals may vary according to countries’ circumstances.

5. We also agree that certain key principles are fundamental, and in this spirit we commit to respect the following core values:

We have a responsibility to ensure sound macroeconomic policies that serve long-term economic objectives and help avoid unsustainable global imbalances.
We have a responsibility to reject protectionism in all its forms, support open markets, foster fair and transparent competition, and promote entrepreneurship and innovation across countries.
We have a responsibility to ensure, through appropriate rules and incentives, that financial and other markets function based on propriety, integrity and transparency and to encourage businesses to support the efficient allocation of resources for sustainable economic performance.
We have a responsibility to provide for financial markets that serve the needs of households, businesses and productive investment by strengthening oversight, transparency, and accountability.
We have a responsibility to secure our future through sustainable consumption, production and use of resources that conserve our environment and address the challenge of climate change.
We have a responsibility to invest in people by providing education, job training, decent work conditions, health care and social safety net support, and to fight poverty, discrimination, and all forms of social exclusion.
We have a responsibility to recognize that all economies, rich and poor, are partners in building a sustainable and balanced global economy in which the benefits of economic growth are broadly and equitably shared. We also have a responsibility to achieve the internationally agreed development goals.
We have a responsibility to ensure an international economic and financial architecture that reflects changes in the world economy and the new challenges of globalization.

G-20 Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth

1. Our countries have a shared responsibility to adopt policies to achieve strong, sustainable and balanced growth, to promote a resilient international financial system, and to reap the benefits of an open global economy. To this end, we recognize that our strategies will vary across countries. In our Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth, we will:

implement responsible fiscal policies, attentive to short-term flexibility considerations and longer-run sustainability requirements.
strengthen financial supervision to prevent the re-emergence in the financial system of excess credit growth and excess leverage and undertake macro prudential and regulatory policies to help prevent credit and asset price cycles from becoming forces of destabilization.
promote more balanced current accounts and support open trade and investment to advance global prosperity and growth sustainability, while actively rejecting protectionist measures.
undertake monetary policies consistent with price stability in the context of market oriented exchange rates that reflect underlying economic fundamentals.
undertake structural reforms to increase our potential growth rates and, where needed, improve social safety nets.
promote balanced and sustainable economic development in order to narrow development imbalances and reduce poverty.

2. We recognize that the process to ensure more balanced global growth must be undertaken in an orderly manner. All G-20 members agree to address the respective weaknesses of their economies.

G-20 members with sustained, significant external deficits pledge to undertake policies to support private savings and undertake fiscal consolidation while maintaining open markets and strengthening export sectors.
G-20 members with sustained, significant external surpluses pledge to strengthen domestic sources of growth. According to national circumstances this could include increasing investment, reducing financial markets distortions, boosting productivity in service sectors, improving social safety nets, and lifting constraints on demand growth.
3. Each G-20 member bears primary responsibility for the sound management of its economy. The G-20 members also have a responsibility to the community of nations to assure the overall health of the global economy. Regular consultations, strengthened cooperation on macroeconomic policies, the exchange of experiences on structural policies, and ongoing assessment can strengthen our cooperation and promote the adoption of sound policies. As part of our process of mutual assessment:

G-20 members will agree on shared policy objectives. These objectives should be updated as conditions evolve.
G-20 members will set out their medium-term policy frameworks and will work together to assess the collective implications of our national policy frameworks for the level and pattern of global growth, and to identify potential risks to financial stability.
G-20 leaders will consider, based on the results of the mutual assessment, and agree any actions to meet our common objectives.
4. We call on our Finance Ministers to develop our process of mutual assessment to evaluate the collective implications of national policies for the world economy. To accomplish this, our Finance Ministers should, with the assistance of the IMF:

Develop a forward looking assessment of G-20 economic developments to help analyze whether patterns of demand and supply, credit, debt and reserves growth are supportive of strong, sustainable and balanced growth.
Assess the implications and consistency of fiscal and monetary policies, credit growth and asset markets, foreign exchange developments, commodity and energy prices, and current account imbalances.
Report regularly to both the G-20 and the IMFC on global economic developments, key risks, and concerns with respect to patterns of growth and suggested G-20 policy adjustments, individually and collectively.

2009年9月18日金曜日

プロフェッショナルは研修のシーズン



毎年、夏から秋のこの時期にかけて私どもは、会計基準のアップデート研修がある。私は、会計士ではないがアクチュアリーとしても保険会計だけでなく、関連するIFRSやUSGAAP、そしてJGAAPの会計基準の改訂に関する研修で何日も缶詰になって研修を受ける。取り分けIFRSの基準の変更の数がとても多いし、抜本的に方法論が変わるのも多い。金融危機を意識した改訂も多いように思われる。最近「選ばれるプロフェッショナル クライアントが本当に求めていること」ジャグディシュ・N・シース、アンドリュー・ソーベル、 羽物 俊樹 翻訳を読んだが、プロフェッショナルが自分の専門で専門家で在り続けていくためには不断の勉強が必要である。そうでないと、知識は直ぐに陳腐化してしまう。著者は加えてジェネラリストとしての周辺知識の吸収もアドバイザリーを行ううえで非常に重要であると指摘している。情報が瞬時に世界を駆け巡る現代社会では、本当にそのとおりと実感している。私自身も外部セミナーに出たり、法人内研修の講師を引き受けたり、国内外のアクチュアリー会議のオーガナイザーや発表者を務めたりで時間はとられるが、このようなネットワークを蓄積することで、現代のプロは、効率の良いCPD(Continuing Professional Development)を維持することが可能になる。IACAも韓国で10月の15th EAAC大会で発表者の講演が終った後のランチミーティングでアジア地域のコンサルティング協会設立のタスクフォースの会合を持ちネットワークの輪を広げていく。また、今年の日本アクチュアリー会の年次大会では、国際関係委員会は、次のテーマでパネルを編成する予定である。

国際関係委員会パネル「The Day After Tomorrow for Insurers」の骨子

2009年9月15日
委員長
吉田 英幸

米国のモーゲージ・ファイナンス市場の片隅から発した世界金融危機は、グローバル金融システム全体の基盤を脅かすに至った。その影響は、保険・年金業界を含むすべての業界に及び、アクチュアリーの将来の業務にも大きな変化をもたらすであろう。「The Day After Tomorrow for Insurers」のパネルでは、(1)規制、リスク・マネジメントと財務報告、(2)資本の配分と活用(モデルの開発と限界)、(3)この金融危機の勝利者は、どのような組織か、また、西洋から東洋への経済的・政治的パワーシフトが世界経済にどのような影響を与えるかにつき、海外のアクチュアリー2名から基調講演いただき、その後に国際関係委員会のMCEV部会、ERM部会、及び商品開発部会からアクチュアリーの技術的視点での影響分析と将来予測を議論する

2009年9月3日木曜日

15th EAAC会議に向けて諸準備


2年に1回アジア諸国で開催されるEAAC(East Asian Actuarial Conference)の第15回の会議が韓国のソウルで10月12日から15日にかけて開催される。その案内は次のリンクを参照。
http://www.eaac15th.org/sub1-1.asp
その発表論文の締め切りが、8月31日であった。私は、IACAのセッションのプログラム編成に責任を持たされているので、スピーカーと司会を探す作業を数ヶ月前から進めていたが、金融庁の発表予定者が、業務の関係で欠席することになったのを除き、一応セッションは埋まった模様でホッとした。私自身も二つの発表を予定しており、一つはIACAの紹介のスライド、もう一つは、MCEVのアジア市場における現状についてのプレゼンで、PwCの中国チームと連携して作成した。何とか無事に締め切りに間に合わせることができたので、あとは本番を待つのみであるが、10月14日のIACA Sessionの後での昼食会では、IACAのメンバーと地域のコンサルティングアクチュアリーを集めて、Asia Pacific Consulting Associationの創設会を行う予定である。関心のある方は、是非参加いただきたい。

2009年8月23日日曜日

中国の大連にいる娘からのたより



私の長女は、外資系の某銀行に勤めてまだ2年目だが、海外出張を命ぜられてついこのあいだはシンガポールに一週間滞在し、その後すぐにまた中国の大連に一ヶ月の出張に派遣された。はてさて、上海や北京はともあれ、大連とは、日本の戦争の歴史に名前が出てくる地域と思われるが、今はどんな街なのだろう。メールは使えるのだろうか、水や食料は大丈夫なのだろうかと親は心配する。でも、今日は電子メールが入り元気にしているようなので、安心した。金融機関の中国戦略の一貫なのだろうか? 日本の生保も最近はアジア進出で、飽和市場の日本の外に事業展開を求める会社が増えているように思える。

(以下引用)
私は今のところおなかもこわさず元気にしています。大連は思ったよりはきれいで発展している都市です。
町の感じやみんなが着ている服、電車など何十年か前の日本のような感じです。
ホテルはすごくきれいで広いのでとてもいいです。が、町にでるととにかくトイレが汚くて臭くて、それだけはどうしてもいやです;毎日上の人と一緒なので、多少疲れますが、とてもいい人なのでよかったです。
今日は一緒に大連の電車にのってみたり、マッサージにいったりしました。明日は少し遠くの観光地に行く予定です。また、明日からシンガポールの人々もくるので、再会できるのが楽しみです。

昨日ついに夜ご飯か水にあたって、すごく苦しい夜中を
過ごしました。。。トイレから離れられなかったので今日はお休みをもらって
ホテルにずっと閉じこもっています。
正露丸を飲んだので、すこしずつ治まってきましたが、まだ胃が時々ズキズキします。
早く治りますように。。。

2009年8月13日木曜日

今年もお盆で帰省















今日8月13日は、お盆で日本民族大移動の日であるが、直前に雨台風や地震があり、休暇を兼ねて旅行された人たちは、夏らしからぬ天気に少々がっかりされたのでないだろうか。私も、一足先に8月9日から12日まで新潟市の実家に帰省し、先祖の墓参りを済ませてから、近くの月岡温泉で家内と一緒に骨休みをさせていただいた。新潟から特急で豊栄までいきバスに乗り換えて20分ほどで、日本最大の米どころの一面の水田地域にある温泉街に到着する。東京の箱根温泉街に負けない位の規模の大旅館・ホテルが建っているのには驚く。8月9日は新潟では恒例の大花火大会で、雨も何とか止んで久しぶりに故郷の花火を見ることができた。不景気とはいえ、なかなかの数の玉が打ち上げられた。フィナーレは、信濃川の昭和大橋の両岸を結んでのナイアガラの滝の落下型の花火とスターマインの連発で終る。子供の頃によく遊んだ白山公園にある白山神社にお参りに行き、見事な蓮の満開の公園の池でしばしの時を過ごした。80歳になる母が、まだ元気で郷里にいてくれるのがとても有難い。

2009年7月11日土曜日

東大駒場のキャンパスでアクチュアリーの国際化について講義


東京大学数理科学研究科のアクチュアリー・統計プログラムコースの非常勤講師としての講義で7月は5回にわたって毎週木曜日の午後に2時間の授業で駒場のキャンパスに行っている。私は昭和46年に理Iに入学したが、それからもう38年の時が経った。今、ここで勉学されている学生さんは、自分の娘とほぼ同じ位の年頃で若さと希望に満ちあふれている。駒場のキャンパスは、建物がかなり改築されているが、深い緑の多種の樹木の美しさは、当時と全く変わっていない。丸の内のビジネス街から電車で1時間弱で駒場まで移動できるが、空気が澄んでいて、梅雨時の草花の薫りに心が和む。講義の内容は、国際アクチュアリー会の組織の仕組みと資本市場の国際化、会計や監督等の国際基準の設定団体の存在とグローバルプレーヤーの動向とアクチュアリーの技術的支援の役割などの大枠を説明し、個別のテーマとしては、保険の米国会計基準(USGAAP)、保険の国際財務報告基準(IFRS)、市場整合的エンベディッド・バリュー(MCEV)、保険会社のM&A、リスク管理(ERM)等である。院生の学生さんが多いようであるが、皆さん熱心に聴いておられて質問もなかなか良いポイントを突いてくる。将来の理系金融マンとして是非優秀な学生さんには金融界に育っていって欲しい。

2009年6月11日木曜日

IAA Tallinn Meetingに出張参加


5月25日から6月1日まで、IAA Meetingsに参加するために、東欧のエストニア国のTallinn市に出張してきた。新型インフルエンザの関係で、海外出張が禁止されている金融機関が多く、日本からの出席者は通常の会議に比べて随分と少なかった。私の属する法人も、原則禁止になっていたが、IACAの議長の立場もあり、上司の了解をとって参加させていただいた。マスクをたくさん持って行ったが、外人は全くそのようなことは気にしておらず、日本との感染に関するリスク認識の温度差を感じた。私の専門は、会計回りのアクチュアリー業務であるので、Insurance Accounting Committeeに多くの時間を参加させていただいた。また、IACAのSection Chairの立場から、Section Chair Meeting, Member Services Committee, Executive Committeeにも参加して、IAAのガバナンスに関する議論にも加わった。私自身のホストするIACA委員会は、5月30日の午前10:30から12:00までであったが、電話会議が再度接続不能の状況で、そのためにバックアップで用意しておいた自分の法人の電話会議番号で、20分ほど遅れて開始した。
後で聞くと、午前と午後を間違えて設定していたようで、この点については、事務局に委員会として適切なサービスを得られていない点を厳重に抗議し、夏までに改善を求めた。ランチの時間は、Global Development Subcommitteeを引き続き開催し、次期IAA会長のポール・ソーントン氏や元IAA会長で英国ガバメントアクチュアリーのクリスデイキン氏の意見も聞くことができた。基本的に、EAACの開催時期に合わせて、アジアパシフィック地域のコンサルティングアクチュアリー会を香港を拠点に創設する方向になりそうである。組織としては、IACAのアジア支部という形体になる。
一方で、午前中のIACA本体の議題は、次のとおりであった。

IACA Committee Agenda – Updated 18 May 2009
30 May 2009 10:30 am – noon Local Time
Meeting

I. Secretary’s Report Morten Harbitz

A. Approve minutes of 2 April 2009 conference call

II. Treasurer’s Report Morten Harbitz

A. 2008 Financial Information
B. Proposed Budget 2009-2012 – Approve 2009
C. Proposal from IAA Regarding Costs and Computer
D. Funds for Digitizing Past IACA Materials
E. Investments

III. Executive Director’s Report Margaret Sherwood

A. Bylaws
B. Geoffrey Heywood Young Consultants Award Task Force
C. Max Lander Award in 2010
D. Nominating Committee
E. Committee Attendance Record
F. Policies and Procedures Manual
G. Members’ Directory – Move to Membership Services Development Committee
H. Meeting Attendance and Cost History
I. Website Update

IV. IAA Governance and Strategic Plan Nick Dumbreck

V. Function Committees’ Reports – Membership, Terms of Reference, and Action Plans

A. Professionalism Committee Emmanuel Tassin
B. Publications and Research Joint Committee Andrew Vaughan
C. Membership Services Development Committee Liyaquat Khan
D. Global Development Committee Hideyuki Yoshida

VI. Convention Function Committee Nick Salter, Chair

A. 5-7 October 2009 - PBSS – Tokyo Ken Buffin
B. 12-15 October 2009 - EAAC – Korea Grace Jiang &
Bozenna Hinton
C. 1-4 November 2009 - CCA - Tucson, Arizona Ken Hohman

VII. 2010 Biennial Meeting - 7-12 March with ICA Meeting - South Africa Mike Codron

VIII. Next Biennial Meetings Hideyuki Yoshida

A. 2012 – 14-17 October - With Consent of Global Conference of Liyaquat Khan
Actuaries, PBSS, and IAAHS – Probably Delhi, India B. 2014 - 30 March - 4 April with ICA meeting - Washington, DC, USA not yet assigned
C. 2016 – Europe-Spain? Probably with PBSS and IAAHS not yet assigned
D. 2018 – Sydney? Berlin? With ICA meeting not yet assigned

IX. Other Business Hideyuki Yoshida

X. Next Meetings Hideyuki Yoshida

A. Conference Calls – Need to Schedule on in mid-to-late July and one in mid-to-late September
(Will do by e-mail)
B. Meeting – 12-15 November 2009 – Hyderabad, India
C. Meeting – 3-6 March 2010 – Cape Town, South Africa (in conjunction with the ICA 2010)
D. Meeting – 10-13 October 2010 – Vienna, Austria
E. Meeting – 5-8 April 2011 – Sydney, Australia
F. Meeting – 29 September – 2 October 2011 – Zagreb, Croatia
G. Meeting – 23-26 May 2012 – Los Angeles, United States
H. Meeting – Fall 2012 - TBD
I. Meeting – 23-26 May 2013 – Netherlands
J. Meeting – Fall 2014 - TBD
K. Meeting – 26-29 March 2014 – Washington, DC (in conjunction with the ICA 2014)

2009年5月17日日曜日

IACA News Letter

TallinnのIAA会議まであと1週間ほどになったが、この豚インフレの中でも決行するようである。私も、25日から一週間ほど出張する予定にしている。会社の承認を得ることになるが。
さて、最近のIACAの活動をまとめたNews Letterを全世界のIACAメンバーに発信したので掲載する。

Dear IACA Members,

As usual I am writing to give you a brief update on recent activity and also draw your attention to a number of future events – both in the near term and in 2010 and beyond!

IACA Committee Activities

The next IACA Committee meeting will take place in Tallinn, Estonia on May 30, 2009.

Professionalism Committee
Mike Codron has resigned as Chair of the IACA Professionalism Committee and has been replaced by Emmanuel Tassin. Morten Harbitz, who is the delegate appointed by Den Norske Aktuarforening on IAA’s Professionalism Committee, will serve as the IACA liaison and report on relevant activities arising from proceedings of the IAA Professionalism Committee.

Publications and Research Committee
A project has been initiated to write a brief history of IACA and an outline of plans for the future development of IACA with a tentative goal of publishing a booklet ready for distribution at the time of ICA 2010. We would be delighted to hear from any members who would be prepared to contribute material for this project.

Membership Services Committee
The Membership Services Committee has been re-constituted as the Membership Services and Development Committee under the chairmanship of Liyaquat Khan, with members Barbara Addie, Ken Buffin, Ken Hohman, Jay Jaffe, Nick Salter, Margaret Sherwood, and Martin Stevenson. IAA-appointed delegate Nick Dumbreck will serve as liaison to the IAA Member Services Committee.

The Committee has finalized its Terms of Reference and Action Plan for 2009-2010. The Committee is proposing a very forward-looking and aggressive plan to extend membership in IACA and to strengthen the role and influence of actuarial consulting globally. We would be pleased to hear from any members who feel that they could help with increasing the IACA membership at a local country/region level.

Global Development Committee
This Committee held a meeting in Limassol on November 4, 2008 to discuss its Terms of Reference and proposed Action Plan. Some present and former IAA officers attended as invited guests and provided valuable advice and comments concerning the role and direction of the committee with respect to global development and interaction with various IAA committees and sub-committees. Ken Buffin will serve as liaison to the IAA Advice and Assistance Committee.

I am working on the establishment of an Asia Pacific regional actuarial consultants association and will be presenting details of this at the next East Asia Actuarial Conference to be held in Seoul, Korea in October, 2009 – more details on the conference are below.

Future Events

PBSS Colloquium in Tokyo
The PBSS Tokyo Colloquium will be held October 4-6 at Toshi Center Hotel, Tokyo in association with the Japanese Society of Certified Pension Actuaries (JSCPA), who will be celebrating their 20th Anniversary. The theme of the Colloquium is Actuarial Management of Pensions and Social Security – Past, Present and Future and there will be an Asian theme to a number of the sessions. Details of the program, including registration, are available on the website at http://4thpbsstokyo.visitors.jp

IACA will participate with a session on Monday October 5 at 15:45-18:00 featuring speakers, Hideyuki Yoshida, Ken Buffin and Yvonne Sin who will address the topics of Role of the Consultant; Influence of Supranational Organizations; Role of World Bank in Pensions and Social Security; and China’s Pension System.

On Wednesday 7 October there will be sessions (in Japanese) to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of JSCPA but all Colloquium attendees are invited to attend the celebratory dinner on Wednesday evening.

East Asia Actuarial Conference
The 15th East Asia Actuarial Conference (EAAC) will be held on October 12-15 at Lotte Hotel, Seoul. Details of the program are available on the website at http://www.eaac15th.org. A half-day session will be allocated to IACA on either October 13 or October 14. Speaker recruitment for the IACA session is progressing with three speakers and topics already confirmed.

ICA 2010
An ad hoc task group has been formed under the leadership of Mike Codron to help organize the IACA sessions for the International Congress of Actuaries to be held in Cape Town, March 7-10, 2010. Full details for the Congress can be found at: http://www.ica2010.com/

Further details on the scientific programme and the first call for papers and presentations are attached.

IACA has been allocated 7 sessions for its members and other interested parties. There can be up to three papers per session. We already have various papers and panel discussions that have been proposed, but we call on all IACA members to please come forward with suggestions of papers they wish to write or with ideas of subjects that could be introduced and then discussed at a suitable session.

In particular we have 2 subjects that have been proposed but as yet no person to write a paper.

These are:

1. Impact of World Economic situation on Actuarial Consulting
2. Accounting issues impacting the actuarial world

If you are interested in writing a paper (including the two subjects above) or have ideas for discussions, please could you send an email to both hideyuki.yoshida@jp.pwc.com and mike.codron@icon.co.za.

One of the panel sessions planned is entitled “The Consulting Actuary: Entrepreneur and Professional” and this will be lead by Jay Jaffe from the US. He is seeking 2 others for the panel. The panel will discuss the dual role which most consulting actuaries have and how best to deal with and balance these responsibilities. He is particularly interested in IACA members who have done something different in their actuarial practices and businesses and who are willing to share their experiences with IACA members.

For example, over the years Jay’s client base has changed from insurance companies to insurance agents and program sponsors. He has developed non-actuarial intellectual property as well as actuarial skills. People now come to him with business proposals rather than simply asking for consulting services.

Please contact Jay Jaffe at jay@actentltd.com to become part of the panel or to suggest someone who would make a good panellist. Each presentation is expected to last 15-20 minutes.


Joint IACA/PBSS/IAAHS Colloquium India 2012
A joint colloquium of IACA, PBSS and IAAHS to be held in India in 2012 was proposed in May 2008 at the time of the Boston 2008 colloquium. Work on planning for this colloquium has already commenced under the leadership of Liyaquat Khan who has formed a local committee comprised of leading consulting actuaries in India. This committee has submitted a comprehensive report that is now under consideration of the full IACA, PBSS and IAAHS committees and it is anticipated that a number of decisions will be reached during the respective committee meetings in Tallinn to facilitate the next steps in the planning process for the joint colloquium in India in 2012.

Other Future Meetings
IACA maintains a close liaison with the Conference of Consulting Actuaries (CCA) in the US and Association of Consulting Actuaries (ACA) in the UK and, when requested, provides input into the planning process concerning potential topics of an international or global nature for consideration by the respective CCA and ACA program planning committees.

The next annual meeting of the CCA is scheduled to be held November 1-4 in Tucson, Arizona – see attached link: http://www.ccactuaries.org/events/am2009/index.html.

The next annual meeting of the ACA would likely follow past practice and be scheduled for early February 2010 at Gatwick, UK.


As ever I will be pleased to hear from members in relation to any aspect of IACA.

Yours truly,


Hideyuki Yoshida
Chairman