Pankkitoiminnan riskienhallinta ja riskienhallintaraportointi Puolassa

Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan julkisesti noteerattujen pankkien riskienhallintaraportoinnin nykykäytäntöä Puolassa. Tutkimus jakaantuu kahteen osaan: Tutkimuksen ensimmäisessä osassa esitellään pankkitoimintaa, pankkitoiminnan riskejä ja riskienhallintaa. Pankkitoiminnan riskejä ovat luotto- ja markkinariskit, lisäksi puhutaan operatiivisista ja ympäristöriskeistä. Tutkimuksen toisessa osassa selvitetään ja kuvataan sitä, millaista on tutkimuksen kohdeyritysten riskienhallinta ja riskienhallintaraportointi, tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on myös verrata pankkien riskienhallintaraportointia keskenään. Tutkimuksen kohteena on 13 Varsovan pörssissä listattua pankkia. Tutkimusaineistona käytetään näiden pankkien vuoden 2005 vuosikertomuksia. Kysymyksessä on laadullinen tapaustutkimus, jolle on tyypillistä kuvaileva ja selittävä tutkimusote. Aineiston analyysimenetelmänä on käytetty pattern matchingiä, jonka avulla tutkitaan aineistosta löytyviä riskienhallintaraportoinnin osatekijöitä/indikaattoreita ja verrataan niitä oletettuihin malleihin. Tutkittujen riskienhallintaraporttien perusteella voidaan todeta, että pankkitoiminnan ydinriskeistä: luotto-, korko-, valuutta- ja likviditeettiriskeistä raportoidaan hyvin. Sen sijaan puutteita löytyy operatiivisten ja ympäristöriskien raportoinnista. Suurin osa pankeista raportoi operatiivisista riskeistä, mutta raportointi on pintapuolista ja analysointi puuttuu. Ympäristöriskeistä raportointi ei ole yleistä. Raportoinnin laajuus ja informatiivisuus vaihtelevat pankkien kesken: Suuret, kansainväliset pankkikonsernit raportoivat riskeistään laajasti ja informatiivisesti, kun taas pienemmillä, kansallisilla pankeilla raportointi jää usean pankin kohdalla suppeaksi. Syitä raportoinnin eroille on monia: Yksi syistä on IFRS-standardien vakiintumaton käyttö pienimmillä, kansallisilla pankeilla verrattuna kansainvälisiin pankkikonserneihin. Kansainvälisillä pankkikonserneilla on paremmat valmiudet raportoida riskienhallinnastaan verrattuna pienimpiin pankkeihin, jotka julkaisivat tilinpäätöksensä ensimmäistä kertaa IFRS-standardien mukaisesti vuonna 2005. Yhtenä selittävänä tekijänäraportoinnin eroille voidaan myös mainita omistuspohja: sijoittajainformaation merkitys on korostunut erityisesti organisaatioissa, joissa on laaja, kansainvälinen omistuspohja. Sen sijaan valtio-omisteisessa yrityksessä sijoittajainformaation merkitys on vähäisempi. Myös yrityskulttuuri vaikuttaa siihen, missä laajuudessa, ja mitä tietoa yritys antaa julkisuuteen. Pankit ovat myös tarkkoja maineestaan, mitä tietoa voidaan julkaista ja mitä vaikutuksia tiedon julkaisemisellaon yrityskuvaan. Sen sijaan pankin koolla ei välttämättä ole vaikutusta riskienhallintaraportoinnin laajuuteen ja informatiivisuuteen.

Utilization of Incident Reporting in The Finnish Maritime Industry

Marine traffic is expected to increase rapidly in the future, both in the Baltic Sea and in the Gulf of Finland. As the number of vessels in the area increases, so does the risk of serious marine accidents. To help prevent such accidents in the future, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has put forth the International Safety Management Code (the ISM Code), which aims to improve the safety of the vessels. The second work package of the Development of maritime safety culture (METKU) project investigates the effects of the ISM Code and potential areas of improvement in maritime safety. The first phase in the work package used a literature review to determine how maritime safety culture could be improved. Continuous improvement, management commitment and personnel empowerment and motivation were found to be essential. In the second phase, shipping companies and administrators were interviewed. It was discovered that especially incident reporting based on continuous improvement was felt to be lacking. This third phase aims to take a closer look at incident reporting and suggest improvements based on the findings. Both the IMO and national legislation encourage shipping companies in incident reporting, and on the national level a shared incident reporting system (ForeSea) is being pushed forward. The objective of this research project was to find out the IMO’s attitude towards incident reporting, to establish a theoretical framework of reference in incident reporting, and to observe how reporting is actually being employed on the seas. Existing incident reporting systems were also researched. The study was carried out using a literature review and the results previously gathered in interviews. The results of phase two were elaborated further for themes relating to incident reporting. According to the findings of this research, the theoretical background of incident reporting dates back to the early 20th century. Although some theories are widely accepted, some have also received criticism. The lack of a concise, shared terminology poses major difficulties in maritime incident reporting and in determining its efficiency. A central finding is the fact that existing incident reporting focuses mostly on information flow away from the ship, whereas the backward information flow is much less planned and monitored. In incident reporting, both nationally and internationally, stakeholders are plenty. The information produced by these parties is scattered, however, and thus not very usable. Based on this research, the centralizing of this information should be made a priority. Traditionally, the success of incident reporting has been determined statistically, from the number of reported incidents. Yet existing reporting systems have not been designed with such statistical analysis in mind, so different methodologies might yield a more comprehensive view. The previous findings of seafarers and management (including shipping companies and administration) having differing views on safety work and safety management were backed up by the results of this study. Seafarers find seamanship and storytelling important, while management wants a more systematic and broad approach on safety matters. The research project was carried out by the Centre for Maritime Studies of the University of Turku, in the Kotka unit (Maritime Logistics Research), with coordination by the Kotka Maritime Research Centre. The major financiers of the project were the European Union and the city of Kotka. The financing authority was the Regional Council of Päijät-Häme. Partners in the project were the shipping companies Finnlines Oyj, Kristina Cruises Oy, Meriaura Oy and VG-Shipping Oy, and the ports of Helsinki, Kotka and Hamina. The partners provided both funding for the project and information for the research.

Genetically Determined Hypometabolism in Alzheimer’s Disease and Midlife Risk Factors for Cognitive Impairment

The role of genetic factors in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is not completely understood. In order to improve this understanding, the cerebral glucose metabolism of seven monozygotic and nine dizygotic twin pairs discordant for AD was compared to that of 13 unrelated controls using positron emission tomography (PET). Traditional region of interest analysis revealed no differences between the non-demented dizygotic co-twins and controls. In contrast, in voxel-level and automated region of interest analyses, the non-demented monozygotic co-twins displayed a lower metabolic rate in temporal and parietal cortices as well as in subcortical grey matter structures when compared to controls. Again, no reductions were seen in the non-demented dizygotic co-twins. The reductions seen in the non-demented monozygotic co-twins may indicate a higher genetically mediated risk of AD or genetically mediated hypometabolism possibly rendering them more vulnerable to AD pathogenesis. With no disease modifying treatment available for AD, prevention of dementia is of the utmost importance. A total of 2 165 at least 65 years old twins of the Finnish Twin Cohort with questionnaire data from 1981 participated in a validated telephone interview assessing cognitive function between 1999 and 2007. Those subjects reporting heavy alcohol drinking in 1981 had an elevated cognitive impairment risk over 20 years later compared to light drinkers. In addition, binge drinking was associated with an increased risk even when total alcohol consumption was controlled for, suggesting that binge drinking is an independent risk factor for cognitive impairment. When compared to light drinkers, also non-drinkers had an increased risk of cognitive impairment. Midlife hypertension, obesity and low leisure time physical activity but not hypercholesterolemia were significant risk factors for cognitive impairment. The accumulation of risk factors increased cognitive impairment risk in an additive manner. A previously postulated dementia risk score based on midlife demographic and cardiovascular factors was validated. The risk score was found to well predict cognitive impairment risk, and cognitive impairment risk increased significantly as the score became higher. However, the risk score is not accurate enough for use in the clinic without further testing.

Hazard Risk Management in Large Nordic Companies' Operations in Russia

The objective of this research was to describe how Nordic companies manage hazard risks in their operations in Russia and how the local business environment is considered to affect the hazard risks. Research methods used in this research were literature review and expert interviews. Twelve Nordic industrial companies operating in different fields of industry were interviewed. Large Nordic companies typically guide risk management centralized from the parent company on behalf of the whole company group and the risk management standards and policies are integrated in all subsidiaries. Parent companies typically control hazard risk management in Russia by regular risk management reporting, auditing the Russian sites and by training local managers and employees to risk management work. Many companies have experienced several losses in the first years of operating in Russia before the risk management policies have been implemented in Russian subsidiaries. The companies have learned to take local characteristics better into account by experience and most companies are quite satisfied with their current risk management standards in Russia. The interviews indicate that companies experience especially the poor quality of infrastructure, some features in Russian organizational culture and high level of criminality to increase hazard risks in Russia. However, understanding these features and risks in the business environment makes the management of these risks possible. Risks related to infrastructure can be managed in advance by decreasing dependencies of infrastructure and considering the infrastructure quality already when planning the business operations. Also good local network is often considered critical in order to overcome the complications related to infrastructure. Russian personnel has typically different attitude towards risk management than Nordic personnel and neglecting safety and maintenance and concealing losses is more typical in Russia. By training and guiding the local personnel risk management and safety work and desired ways of actions these risks can be decreased. Criminality risks are often managed to certain extent by investing in security, increasing supervising and paying attention to reliability of the employees and other interest groups of the company.