ABSTRACT
The preceding chapters explained that the Basel Accord provided the G-10 states with fairly wide discretionary powers for determining how the agreement was operationalized in their banking laws and regulatory codes. Though the Accord’s text expressed the hope that the credit risk rules “be applied as uniformly as possible at the national level,” the responsibility for interpreting and enforcing the agreement was delegated to the national-level policymakers.1
Chapter 3 presented a variety of theoretical propositions regarding the conditions in which we would expect states to implement strict or lax interpretations of the Basel rules and thus effect transnational capital adequacy rule convergence or persistent divergence.
