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。
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。
登録:
投稿 (Atom)