Journal of Financial Services Research

, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 145–161 | Cite as

A Theoretical Framework for Incorporating Scenarios into Operational Risk Modeling



In this paper, I introduce a theoretically justified framework that incorporates scenario analysis into operational risk modeling. The basis for the framework is the idea that only worst-case scenarios contain valuable information about the tail behavior of operational losses. In addition, worst-case scenarios introduce a natural order among scenarios that makes possible a comparison of the ordered scenario losses with the corresponding quantiles of the severity distribution that research derives from historical losses. Worst-case scenarios contain information that enters the quantification process in the form of lower bound constraints on the specific quantiles of the severity distribution. The framework gives rise to several alternative approaches to incorporating scenarios.


Operational risk Scenario analysis Constrained estimation The Markov chain Monte Carlo method (MCMC) Stochastic dominance 

JEL Classification

G21 G14 G20 


  1. Basel II (2005) International convergence of capital measurement and capital standards: a revised framework. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, BIS, Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkowitz J (2000) A coherent framework for stress testing. J Risk 2(2):1–11Google Scholar
  3. Böcker K, Klüppelberg C (2005) Operational VaR: a closed-form approximation. Risk Mag 12:90–93Google Scholar
  4. Chib S (2001) Markov chain Monte Carlo methods: computation and inference. In: Heckman JJ, Leamer E (eds) Handbook of econometrics, vol 5. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 3569–3649Google Scholar
  5. Dutta K, Babbel D (2010) Scenario analysis in the measurement of operational risk capital: a change of measure approach. Working paper, Worton School of Business, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  6. El Gamal M, Inanoglu H, Stengel M (2007) Multivariate estimation for operational risk with judicious use of extreme value theory. J Oper Risk 2(1):21–54Google Scholar
  7. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York, 555 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Levy H (2006) Stochastic dominance: investent decision making under uncertainty, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin, 440 ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Sahay A, Wan Z, Keller B (2007) Operational risk capital: asymptotics in the case of heavy-tailed severity. J Oper Risk 2(2):61–72Google Scholar
  10. The Final Rule (2007) Risk-based capital standards: advanced capital adequacy framework—Basel II, final rule. The Office of the Comptroller of Currency, The Federal Reserve System, The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and The Office of Thrift SupervisionGoogle Scholar
  11. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Federal Reserve Bank of RichmondCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations