Clément Rouveyrol
Market Infrastructure & Payments
- Division
Oversight
- Current Position
-
Lead Oversight Expert
- Fields of interest
-
Financial Economics
- Education
- 2011-2013
MA in Public Administration, Sciences Po Paris, France
- 2008-2011
BA in Political Sciences, Sciences Po Paris, France
- Professional experience
- 2024-
Lead Oversight Expert - Oversight Division, Directorate General Market Infrastructure & Payments, European Central Bank
- 2022-2024
Economist - EU Institutions & Fora Division, Directorate General International & European Relations, European Central Bank
- 2017-2021
Oversight Expert - Oversight Division, Directorate General Market Infrastructure & Payments, European Central Bank
- 2015-2017
Oversight Expert - Directorate Payment Systems & Market Infrastructure, Banque de France
- 30 March 2026
- OCCASIONAL PAPER SERIES - No. 383Details
- Abstract
- This paper provides an evidence-based assessment of the EU supervisory landscape by combining a comprehensive mapping of supervisory models and authorities with an analysis of capital market players across key sectors, including market infrastructures, asset management, and crypto-asset service providers. It documents a highly complex and fragmented supervisory architecture, characterised by a wide variety of national supervisory models and multiple authorities operating across the Union. While regulatory harmonisation through the Single Rulebook has progressed, supervisory responsibilities for capital market players remain largely national, with limited and uneven EU-level powers. This institutional fragmentation is increasingly misaligned with market realities, as capital markets have become more cross-border and integrated, albeit with important differences across sectors. The paper develops an analytical framework to assess options for a review of the EU capital markets supervisory architecture. Based on the sectoral mapping, it distils a few guiding principles for supervisory integration: a consistent approach based on common criteria (such as size and cross-border relevance) while accounting for sectoral specificities, and close cooperation between EU and national authorities. Finally, it conducts a sensitivity analysis around alternative degrees of supervisory integration and calibration criteria, and discusses the governance arrangements needed to make integrated supervision effective in practice. The analysis shows that a more integrated supervisory framework could deliver four key benefits: enhanced supervisory effectiveness, improved supervisory efficiency, reduced complexity and compliance burdens for firms operating across jurisdictions, and the removal of supervisory barriers that currently hinder the cross-border integration of EU capital markets.
- JEL Code
- E61 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook→Policy Objectives, Policy Designs and Consistency, Policy Coordination
F36 : International Economics→International Finance→Financial Aspects of Economic Integration
G18 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Government Policy and Regulation
G20 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→General
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors
- 30 March 2026
- THE ECB BLOGDetails
- JEL Code
- G10 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→General
G20 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→General
G30 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→General
F30 : International Economics→International Finance→General
- 11 March 2025
- OCCASIONAL PAPER SERIES - No. 369Last updated on 19 May 2025Details
- Abstract
- The European Union needs a single market for capital. Well-developed and integrated capital markets are necessary to support economic growth and resilience across the region, while offering benefits for businesses, households and financial stability. This paper examines the importance of the CMU for achieving five strategic objectives: supporting innovation and productivity, financing the twin transition, shoring up pension savings, strengthening alternatives to bank financing, and fostering convergence and inclusion. It highlights the progress made over the past decade, the challenges encountered and the renewed impetus behind the CMU initiative. The paper proposes concrete steps for moving forward, building on long-standing priorities supported by the ECB and the current policy debate on the CMU. First, it suggests facilitating access to capital markets by creating a new standard for a European savings and investment product. Second, it emphasises the importance of expanding capital markets across borders. This would be facilitated by making improvements towards achieving a more integrated supervisory ecosystem, establishing an integrated trading and post-trading landscape that leverages potential benefits of the digital transition, and a more active securitisation market that does not compromise on financial stability. Third, the paper highlights the need to channel capital towards innovative and competitive firms by increasing opportunities for equity and venture capital financing. These actions should be complemented by longer-term initiatives. They would include the ongoing commitment to address obstacles stemming from the lack of harmonisation of insolvency laws, corporate and taxation regimes, designing a safe asset for Europe, completing the banking union, and promoting financial literacy and inclusion.
- JEL Code
- E61 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook→Policy Objectives, Policy Designs and Consistency, Policy Coordination
F36 : International Economics→International Finance→Financial Aspects of Economic Integration
G18 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Government Policy and Regulation
G24 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Investment Banking, Venture Capital, Brokerage, Ratings and Ratings Agencies
G51 : Financial Economics
O16 : Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth→Economic Development→Financial Markets, Saving and Capital Investment, Corporate Finance and Governance
- 18 June 2024
- FINANCIAL INTEGRATION AND STRUCTURE BOXExamining the causes and consequences of the recent listing gap between the United States and EuropeFinancial Integration and Structure in the Euro Area 2024Details
- Abstract
- In view of recent high-profile delistings from European stock exchanges and the widening gap in listings compared to the US, this Box sheds more light on the gap in listings between the United States and Europe. It examines the reasons behind the delisting activities of EU companies and identifies mergers and acquisitions as the key determinant over time, including in recent years. In addition, an examination of the trends of dual and US listings of European firms suggests a growing attractiveness of US markets for European firms. This suggests that policy measures may be needed to make EU listings more appealing, particularly for larger companies, by enhancing market depth and liquidity and possibly further consolidating European stock exchanges.
- JEL Code
- G10 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→General
G15 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→International Financial Markets
G34 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Mergers, Acquisitions, Restructuring, Corporate Governance
- 3 March 2020
- FINANCIAL INTEGRATION AND STRUCTURE ARTICLEFinancial Integration and Structure in the Euro Area 2020Details
- Abstract
- Brexit will result in a substantial structural change to the EU’s financial architecture over the coming years. It could be particularly significant for derivatives clearing, investment banking activities and securities and derivatives trading as the reliance on service provision by UK financial firms is more pronounced in these areas and the provision of such services is currently linked to the EU passporting regime. At the same time, the precise overall impact of Brexit on the EU’s future financial architecture in general – and on these specific areas in particular – is difficult to predict at this stage, and may change over time. This special feature makes a first attempt at analysing some of the factors that may affect the EU’s financial architecture post-Brexit. It focuses on areas which currently show strong reliance on the UK and are of particular relevance for the ECB under its various mandates.