In addition, the experiences of the financial crisis have also led to a change in behaviour in the financial sector. The financial situation appears stable and the banks' increase in lending is not so high that it can be interpreted as greater risk-taking in the financial sector. Approximately SEK 420 billion of the total lending by mortgage institutions comprises loans to purchase apartment blocks. This is a large percentage, almost 40 per cent of the total lending by these institutions. However, the figures on lending during the 1990s show that both the percentage and the volume of lending in this area is declining. Statistics provided by the mortgage institutions with regard to gross flows of loans for various purposes with apartment blocks as collateral confirm this picture. In 1991 new building was the reason for most of the lending, while renovation and extensions accounted for only a minor part. During 2001, on the other hand, new building accounted for a small part, renovation and extensions for even less, while the largest percentage was for other purposes. Why is this? Naturally, it is related to the way the sub-markets function. The market for single-family dwellings functions well with buyers and sellers agreeing on a market price when houses are sold. Once a single-family dwelling has been built, the market functions well without any major disturbances from restrictions or regulations.
A higher capital adequacy requirement for taking bigger risks will thus lead to the banks being forced to charge more for lending money to higher risk borrowers. This is a regulatory system that is used by 120 countries and it contributes to financial stability around the world. However, the current capital adequacy rules from 1988 are divided into 4 fairly rough risk classes, which do not very well reflect the risk with various borrowers. For instance, the risk classification means that all companies are in the same risk class, despite the fact that they can differ markedly from one another. There has therefore been intensive work on further developing these rules by the Basel Committee, in which both the Riksbank and Finansinspektionen (the Swedish financial supervisory authority) participate. The idea with the new rules is that the risk weighting will better reflect the actual credit risk. This means that the banks will become more thorough in assessing the relationship between the risk in the credit and its yield. An increased risk will therefore be marked in the banks’ pricing of loans, i.e. the interest rate. There are both advantages and disadvantages with the proposed capital adequacy rules. The proposed rules mean that the banks must hold more capital if the risks in their given loans increase. If they do not have more capital than the rules require, they must either acquire more capital or reduce the risks in their lending.