Sharing global regulatory space: transatlantic coordination of the G20 OTC derivatives reforms1

H. Marjosola
{"title":"Sharing global regulatory space: transatlantic coordination of the G20 OTC derivatives reforms1","authors":"H. Marjosola","doi":"10.4337/9781839101120.00013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The governance of the global market for over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives has undergone a metamorphosis. Set in motion by the Group of Twenty (G20) 2009 summit in Pittsburgh, the regulatory overhaul has transformed what used to be a relatively harmonious and transnational legal regime into a global regulatory space which – like all regulatory spaces (Hancher and Moran 1998) – is highly contested. In the light of the hypotheses developed in Chapter 1 of this book, this chapter evaluates the implementation and coordination of the globally agreed derivatives reforms in and between the United States and the European Union (for earlier research on this topic, see Godwin et al. 2017). The chapter focuses specifically on the possible implications of coordination challenges for regulatory structures. The hypothesis is that, together with the risk of regulatory arbitrage, regulatory competition contributes to regulatory centralisation in internal regulatory structures. Prompted by the Global Financial Crisis, the G20 initiatives aimed to increase the transparency and stability of derivative markets, particularly by centralising the execution of trading within regulated trading venues and by imposing mandatory clearing, reporting and risk-management requirements. However, instalment of the new governance system has been cumbersome. Much of the consensus reached under the G20 umbrella was lost when soft principles and policy goals were translated into hard rules. As section 5.2 will show, failures in coordination have resulted in an uneven regulatory playing field characterised by jurisdictional conflicts, inconsistencies, regulatory overlaps and gaps (Carney 2013, p. 15). The Financial Stability Board (FSB), mandated by the G20 to oversee and coordinate the implementation of the reforms, has also admitted that due to the unprecedented scale and complexity of the reforms and unforeseen challenges the implementation “has taken longer than","PeriodicalId":426332,"journal":{"name":"Governing Finance in Europe","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governing Finance in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839101120.00013","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

The governance of the global market for over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives has undergone a metamorphosis. Set in motion by the Group of Twenty (G20) 2009 summit in Pittsburgh, the regulatory overhaul has transformed what used to be a relatively harmonious and transnational legal regime into a global regulatory space which – like all regulatory spaces (Hancher and Moran 1998) – is highly contested. In the light of the hypotheses developed in Chapter 1 of this book, this chapter evaluates the implementation and coordination of the globally agreed derivatives reforms in and between the United States and the European Union (for earlier research on this topic, see Godwin et al. 2017). The chapter focuses specifically on the possible implications of coordination challenges for regulatory structures. The hypothesis is that, together with the risk of regulatory arbitrage, regulatory competition contributes to regulatory centralisation in internal regulatory structures. Prompted by the Global Financial Crisis, the G20 initiatives aimed to increase the transparency and stability of derivative markets, particularly by centralising the execution of trading within regulated trading venues and by imposing mandatory clearing, reporting and risk-management requirements. However, instalment of the new governance system has been cumbersome. Much of the consensus reached under the G20 umbrella was lost when soft principles and policy goals were translated into hard rules. As section 5.2 will show, failures in coordination have resulted in an uneven regulatory playing field characterised by jurisdictional conflicts, inconsistencies, regulatory overlaps and gaps (Carney 2013, p. 15). The Financial Stability Board (FSB), mandated by the G20 to oversee and coordinate the implementation of the reforms, has also admitted that due to the unprecedented scale and complexity of the reforms and unforeseen challenges the implementation “has taken longer than
共享全球监管空间:跨大西洋协调G20场外衍生品改革1
全球场外(OTC)衍生品市场的治理经历了一次蜕变。2009年在匹兹堡举行的二十国集团(G20)峰会启动了监管改革,将过去相对和谐的跨国法律制度转变为一个全球监管空间,就像所有监管空间一样(Hancher和Moran, 1998年),这个监管空间竞争激烈。根据本书第1章中提出的假设,本章评估了美国和欧盟内部以及之间全球商定的衍生品改革的实施和协调(关于该主题的早期研究,请参阅Godwin et al. 2017)。本章特别侧重于协调挑战对监管结构的可能影响。其假设是,加上监管套利的风险,监管竞争导致了内部监管结构中的监管集中化。在全球金融危机的推动下,G20倡议旨在提高衍生品市场的透明度和稳定性,特别是通过在受监管的交易场所集中执行交易,以及实施强制性清算、报告和风险管理要求。然而,新治理体系的实施一直很繁琐。当软原则和政策目标被转化为硬规则时,在G20保护伞下达成的许多共识就消失了。正如5.2节所示,协调失败导致了不平衡的监管竞争环境,其特征是管辖权冲突、不一致、监管重叠和空白(Carney 2013,第15页)。由G20授权监督和协调改革实施的金融稳定委员会(FSB)也承认,由于改革的规模和复杂性前所未有,以及不可预见的挑战,实施“花费了比以往更长时间”
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信