Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi pelaksanaan risk governance yang dilakukan oleh Kementerian Keuangan Kemenkeu . Sebagai salah satu instansi pemerintah, Kemenkeu menjadi penggagas pelaksanaan manajemen risiko pada tahun 2008 dan mulai menerapkan enterprise risk management ERM pada tahun 2016. ERM sendiri merupakan kombinasi antara risk management traditional dan risk governance. Oleh karena itu, risk governance menjadi hal yang penting dalam implementasi ERM Kemenkeu. Penelitian ini menggunakan wawancara mendalam dan kuesioner hasil modifikasi Financial Stability Board FSB Thematic Review dalam mereviu pelaksanaan risk governance pada 24 negara di tahun 2013. Hasil penelitian ini memberikan pemaparan bagaimana penerapan risk governance Kemenkeu. Kesimpulannya, rerata empat variabel tersebut sudah cukup sesuai dengan kriteria yang disampaikan oleh FSB. Namun, efektifitas pelaksanaan manajemen risiko dirasa belum optimal. Hal ini dikarenakan pengelolaannya belum terintegrasi dan selaras dalam pencapaian sasaran strategis. Selain itu, pengelolaan risiko dirasa membebani sebagai kewajiban administrasi. Hal ini dikarenakan pengelolaannya yang bersifat manual dan belum tersedianya aplikasi pendukung. Terakhir, peran dan tanggung jawab Pimpinan dan Komite Risiko sebagai salah satu peran sentral diharapkan dapat lebih baik dalam membangun budaya sadar risiko.

---

ABSTRACTThis study aimed to evaluate the implementation of risk governance conducted by the Ministry of Finance MoF . As one of the government agencies, the Ministry of Finance became the initiator of the implementation of risk management in 2008 and began to implement enterprise risk management ERM in 2016. The ERM itself is a combination of traditional risk management and risk governance. Therefore, risk governance becomes important in the implementation of ERM MoF. This study uses in depth interviews and questionnaires modified Thematic Review Financial Stability Board in reviewing the implementation of risk governance in 24 countries in 2013. The study provides an explanation of how the application of risk governance MOF. In conclusion, the mean of four variables is sufficient according to the criteria presented by the FSB. However, the effectiveness of risk management are still not optimal. This is because management has not been integrated and aligned in achieving strategic objectives. In addition, the risk management perceived as burdensome administrative obligations. This is due to manual management and the unavailability of supporting applications. Finally, the role and responsibilities of Chairman and Risk Committee as one of the central role is expected to be better in building a culture of risk awareness."

"Studi ini menganalisis bagaimana tata kelola risiko dan struktur kepemilikan mempengaruhi perilaku pengambilan risiko bank di negara-negara Asean-5. Sampel penelitian terdiri dari 34 bank dari tahun 2012 hingga 2021, dengan menggunakan metode regresi data panel. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa risk governance berdampak negatif dan signifikan terhadap credit risk, dan liquidity risk. Sedangkan, berpengaruh positif dan tidak signifikan terhadap operational risk dan negatif tidak signifikan terhadap insolvency risk. Selanjutnya, ownership structure berdampak negatif dan tidak signifikan terhadap credit risk dan operational risk, namun berpengaruh positif dan tidak signifikan terhadap liquidity risk dan insolvency risk. Selain itu, Bank Size juga terlihat berpengaruh signifikan terhadap credit risk, liquidity risk, operational risk, dan insolvency risk. Maka, regulator maupun perbankan dapat mengoptimalisasi risk governance, terutama mengenai risk committee meetings dengan meningkatkan frekuensi pertemuaan secara periodik.

---

This study analyzes how risk governance and ownership structure influence bank risk-taking behavior in ASEAN-5 countries. The research sample consists of 34 banks from 2012 to 2021, using the panel data regression method. The results of the study show that risk governance has a negative and significant impact on credit and liquidity risk. Meanwhile, it has a positive and insignificant impact on operational risk and a negative and significant impact on insolvency risk. Furthermore, ownership structure has a negative and insignificant impact on credit and operational risk but a positive and insignificant impact on liquidity and insolvency risk. Additionally, bank size seems to have a significant effect on credit, liquidity, operational, and insolvency risk. Thus, regulators and banks can optimize risk governance, particularly at risk committee meetings, by increasing the frequency of meetings on a periodic basis."

"ABSTRAKTujuan utama penelitian ini adalah untuk menginvestigasi pengaruh praktik risk governance terhadap kualitas operational risk disclosure (ORD) dan kinerja perbankan ASEAN-5. Pengaruh praktik risk governance terhadap kinerja bank diuji secara langsung dan tidak langsung melalui kualitas ORD. Penelitian ini juga bertujuan menginvestigasi peran kompetisi pasar terhadap hubungan praktik risk governance dan kualitas ORD. Kontribusi utama penelitian ini adalah dalam mengukur praktik risk governance menggunakan indeks yang didasarkan pada pedoman tata kelola terakhir yang diterbitkan oleh BCBS pada tahun 2015. Sampel penelitian adalah perusahaan perbankan yang terdaftar di bursa saham negara-negara ASEAN-5 (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapura, Thailand, Filipina) dengan kurun waktu pengamatan 2010-2014. Metode pengumpulan data menggunakan purposive sampling dengan 285 jumlah sampel akhir, dan model analisis regresi data panel adalah Pooled Model dengan estimator Weighted Least Square (WLS).Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa praktik risk governance dan kompetisi pasar mampu mendorong bank untuk meningkatkan kualitas ORD. Tingkat kompetisi juga memoderasi pengaruh positif praktik risk governance terhadap kualitas ORD. Hasil investigasi ini mengindikasikan efek substitusi dari kompetisi yang dapat menurunkan konsekuensi negatif dari pengaruh praktik risk governance yang lemah. Praktik risk governance secara langsung berpengaruh negatif terhadap ROA dan PER bank. Akan tetapi praktik risk governance berpengaruh positif terhadap kinerja bank jika dimediasi oleh kualitas ORD. Sementara itu kompetisi pasar dan kualitas ORD tidak memiliki pengaruh terhadap ROA dan PER bank. Selanjutnya pengujian robustness dan pengujian tambahan dilakukan dengan mengganti pengukuran kompetisi pasar dari metode Panzar-Rosse menjadi Lerner Index; menguji kualitas ORD yang sukarela (voluntary); menguji penggunaan time lag, mengeluarkan sampel bank Singapura, dan mengganti PER dengan PBV. Hasil-hasil pengujian ini menunjukkan robust dan memperkuat investigasi hipotesis utama.

---

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of risk governance practices on the quality of operational risk disclosure (ORD), and bank performance on the scope of ASEAN-5. The influence of risk governance practices on bank performance is tested directly and indirectly through the quality of ORD. This study also aims to investigate the role of market competition on the relationship of risk governance practices and the quality of ORD. The main contribution of this study is in measuring risk governance practices using indexes based on the latest governance guidelines published by BCBS by 2015. The research sample is banking companies listed on the ASEAN-5 stock exchange (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Philippines) with 2010-2014 observation period. The data collection method used is the purposive sampling with 285 final samples, and the panel data regression analysis model is Pooled Model with Weighted Least Square (WLS) estimator.

The research findings show that risk governance practices and market competition are able to encourage the bank to improve ORD quality. The level of competition also moderates the positive influence of risk governance practices on the quality of ORD. The risk governance practices directly affect negatively the bank ROA and PER. However, risk governance practices have a positive effect on bank performance if mediated by ORD quality. That is, risk governance practices can encourage managers to present ORD quality that improves bank performance. Meanwhile, market competition and ORD quality have no effect on bank ROA and PER. Further robustness and additional testing are done by changing the measurement of market competition from Panzar-Rosse to Lerner Index; testing the voluntary of ORD quality; testing the time-lag, omitting the Singaporean bank sample, and replacing PER with PBV. The results of these tests are robust and strengthen the investigation of the main hypothesis."

"Contested Knowledge argues that the structural coupling between science and media in the context of risk politics has led to the creation of a scientific public sphere in the state of Kerala, India, and regional newspapers have become the most prominent site of public deliberation over science since the late 1990s. This new form of public engagement with science radically differed from its earlier form nurtured by the Kerala Sasthra Sahithya Parishad (KSSP), the largest peoples science movement in India. The book discusses this shift and the resultant transformations of the scientific-citizen public of Kerala by examining three public controversies over science deliberated in the regional dailies in the early 2000s. Public deliberations during the controversies over clinical trials in the Regional Cancer Centre (RCC), Thiruvananthapuram, a series of micro-earthquakes and well collapses, and the strange phenomenon of coloured rain are analysed to understand how risks were perceived, knowledge claims were contested, disciplinary rigidities were dismantled and trust in science and the credibility of scientific institutions were re-negotiated. The book thus explores how the public contestation of knowledge staged by the mass media contributes to deepening democracy by re-instilling politics into science. Democratization of science under the agency of the scientific-citizen publics, the book suggests, is nonetheless limited as it fails to account for alternative forms of engagement offered by multiple publics. The book contends that the theory of deliberative democracy is inadequate to capture the multiplicity of public engagement with science."