Principles-Based Regulation and Public Trust in the Post-Crisis World: The Dutch Case of Financial Services

H. Bröring, O. Cherednychenko
{"title":"Principles-Based Regulation and Public Trust in the Post-Crisis World: The Dutch Case of Financial Services","authors":"H. Bröring, O. Cherednychenko","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3746600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution reveals an uneasy relationship between principles-based regulation and public trust in financial institutions and services in the post-crisis era, with a particular focus on Dutch financial supervision legislation. The main question addressed is whether principles-based regulation is the right way to overcome the crisis of trust in the financial markets. The authors argue that the acceptance of principles-based regulation in the Dutch legal order is to be welcomed. At the same time, resort to principles-based regulation entails many challenges which may undermine its effectiveness and, hence, public trust in the financial markets. These challenges in the Netherlands include but are not limited to the absence of any significant pressure on the financial watchdogs to clarify the meaning of open norms, the lack of clarity concerning the status of public soft law already produced to this end, and tension between public and private soft law in shaping the content of open norms. Without addressing these challenges, principles-based regulation may prove to be too obscure to guide the financial services industry towards a cultural change.","PeriodicalId":236019,"journal":{"name":"University of Groningen Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Groningen Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3746600","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This contribution reveals an uneasy relationship between principles-based regulation and public trust in financial institutions and services in the post-crisis era, with a particular focus on Dutch financial supervision legislation. The main question addressed is whether principles-based regulation is the right way to overcome the crisis of trust in the financial markets. The authors argue that the acceptance of principles-based regulation in the Dutch legal order is to be welcomed. At the same time, resort to principles-based regulation entails many challenges which may undermine its effectiveness and, hence, public trust in the financial markets. These challenges in the Netherlands include but are not limited to the absence of any significant pressure on the financial watchdogs to clarify the meaning of open norms, the lack of clarity concerning the status of public soft law already produced to this end, and tension between public and private soft law in shaping the content of open norms. Without addressing these challenges, principles-based regulation may prove to be too obscure to guide the financial services industry towards a cultural change.
危机后世界中基于原则的监管与公众信任:荷兰金融服务业案例
这一贡献揭示了在后危机时代,基于原则的监管与公众对金融机构和服务的信任之间的不稳定关系,并特别关注了荷兰的金融监管立法。讨论的主要问题是,基于原则的监管是否是克服金融市场信任危机的正确途径。作者认为,在荷兰法律秩序中接受基于原则的监管是值得欢迎的。与此同时,采用基于原则的监管会带来许多挑战,可能会削弱其有效性,从而削弱公众对金融市场的信任。荷兰面临的这些挑战包括但不限于对金融监管机构没有任何重大压力来澄清开放规范的含义,缺乏关于为此目的已经产生的公共软法地位的明确性,以及公共和私人软法在形成开放规范内容方面的紧张关系。如果不解决这些挑战,基于原则的监管可能会被证明过于模糊,无法引导金融服务业进行文化变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信