Motivating the Use of Different Macro-prudential Instruments: the Countercyclical Capital Buffer vs. Borrower-Based Measures
比较了逆周期资本缓冲和借款人导向措施（如贷款价值比和收入比限制）两种宏观审慎工具，发现前者增强银行体系韧性，后者直接影响家庭韧性和抵押贷款流动，政策制定者可灵活组合使用以应对系统性风险。
In the implementation of macro-prudential policy, macro-prudential authorities such as the Central Bank of Ireland face policy choices as to how best to mitigate systemic risk(s). This Letter focuses on one such policy choice. The Letter conceptually assesses a capital-based tool (the countercyclical capital buffer) compared with borrower-based instruments (e.g. loan-to-value and loan-to-income restrictions). The Letter also briefly reviews the implementation of these tools across Europe. It is found that at a high level the countercyclical capital buffer tends to be viewed as best suited, although not limited, to enhancing the resilience of the banking system. Borrower-based measures, then, provide a tool that can be used to target the resilience of households or impact directly on the flow of mortgage lending. These instruments are flexible however and policymakers can tailor their implementation, either individually or in combination, to ensure an appropriate macro-prudential policy stance with respect to the prevailing systemic risk environment.