ETHICAL FINANCE AS A SYSTEMIC CHALLENGE: RISK, CULTURE, AND STRUCTURE

Q2 Social Sciences
S. Omarova
{"title":"ETHICAL FINANCE AS A SYSTEMIC CHALLENGE: RISK, CULTURE, AND STRUCTURE","authors":"S. Omarova","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/h6tx7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 27, No. 3, p. 797, 2018In recent years, there has been no shortage of scandals involving fraudulent, predatory, and otherwise ethically unacceptable behavior on the part of large U.S. and non-U.S. financial institutions. Reverse redlining and targeting of racial minorities and other vulnerable segments of the population for subprime mortgages, collusive price-fixing in the world’s most important interbank lending and trading markets, and fraudulent creation of client accounts by bank employees pressured to generate fees for the bank are only some of the recent examples of such blatantly unethical behavior. Much of this behavior was also directly implicated in the generation of unsustainable levels of risk in the financial system, which led to the global financial crisis of 2008-2009.Not surprisingly, industry regulators and scholars of financial markets have been increasingly vocal in their criticisms of the financial industry’s systematic failure to maintain high ethical standards of business conduct. Much of the regulators’ and academics’ attention in this area is focused on individual financial institutions’ apparent inability to foster a strong internal culture of pursuing market objectives through ethical and socially responsible means. Accordingly, the potential remedy for this problem is often seen as a matter of improving the firms’ culture of risk-taking, so that they develop a genuine commitment to seek private gains without creating systemically destabilizing risks or otherwise endangering the well-being of their clients, creditors, and the rest of the society. In effect, this recent “ethics turn” in financial regulation recasts firms’ “risk culture” as a crucial determinant of success, or failure, of the post-crisis search for systemic financial stability.This Article analyzes the principal themes in the newly reinvigorated public debate on the role of ethical norms and cultural factors in financial markets and identifies its key conceptual and normative limitations. It argues that the principal flaw in that debate is that it tends to ignore the critical role of systemic, structural factors in shaping individual firms’ internal cultural norms and attitudes toward legitimate business conduct. Reversing the causality assumption underlying the current academic and policy discourse on institutional culture, the Article discusses how broader reform measures seeking to alter the fundamental structure and dynamics of the financial market--on a macro- rather than micro-level--would profoundly, and far more effectively, alter individuals’ and firms’ normative choices and attitudes. The key to making finance ethically sound, therefore, is to make it structurally sound – and to do so on a systemic level.","PeriodicalId":39833,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":"27 1","pages":"797-839"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/h6tx7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 27, No. 3, p. 797, 2018In recent years, there has been no shortage of scandals involving fraudulent, predatory, and otherwise ethically unacceptable behavior on the part of large U.S. and non-U.S. financial institutions. Reverse redlining and targeting of racial minorities and other vulnerable segments of the population for subprime mortgages, collusive price-fixing in the world’s most important interbank lending and trading markets, and fraudulent creation of client accounts by bank employees pressured to generate fees for the bank are only some of the recent examples of such blatantly unethical behavior. Much of this behavior was also directly implicated in the generation of unsustainable levels of risk in the financial system, which led to the global financial crisis of 2008-2009.Not surprisingly, industry regulators and scholars of financial markets have been increasingly vocal in their criticisms of the financial industry’s systematic failure to maintain high ethical standards of business conduct. Much of the regulators’ and academics’ attention in this area is focused on individual financial institutions’ apparent inability to foster a strong internal culture of pursuing market objectives through ethical and socially responsible means. Accordingly, the potential remedy for this problem is often seen as a matter of improving the firms’ culture of risk-taking, so that they develop a genuine commitment to seek private gains without creating systemically destabilizing risks or otherwise endangering the well-being of their clients, creditors, and the rest of the society. In effect, this recent “ethics turn” in financial regulation recasts firms’ “risk culture” as a crucial determinant of success, or failure, of the post-crisis search for systemic financial stability.This Article analyzes the principal themes in the newly reinvigorated public debate on the role of ethical norms and cultural factors in financial markets and identifies its key conceptual and normative limitations. It argues that the principal flaw in that debate is that it tends to ignore the critical role of systemic, structural factors in shaping individual firms’ internal cultural norms and attitudes toward legitimate business conduct. Reversing the causality assumption underlying the current academic and policy discourse on institutional culture, the Article discusses how broader reform measures seeking to alter the fundamental structure and dynamics of the financial market--on a macro- rather than micro-level--would profoundly, and far more effectively, alter individuals’ and firms’ normative choices and attitudes. The key to making finance ethically sound, therefore, is to make it structurally sound – and to do so on a systemic level.
作为系统性挑战的道德金融:风险、文化和结构
《康奈尔大学法律与公共政策杂志》,第27卷,第3期,第7972018页。近年来,美国和非美国大型金融机构的欺诈、掠夺和道德上不可接受的行为丑闻层出不穷。针对少数族裔和其他弱势群体的次级抵押贷款的反向红线划分、世界上最重要的银行间借贷和交易市场的串通定价,以及银行员工迫于压力为银行收取费用而欺诈性创建客户账户,都只是最近此类公然不道德行为的一些例子。这种行为在很大程度上也与金融系统中不可持续风险水平的产生直接相关,这导致了2008-2009年的全球金融危机,行业监管机构和金融市场学者对金融业系统性地未能保持高道德标准的商业行为提出了越来越多的批评。监管机构和学者在这一领域的大部分注意力都集中在个别金融机构显然无法培养一种强大的内部文化,即通过道德和社会责任的方式追求市场目标。因此,解决这一问题的潜在补救措施通常被视为改善企业的冒险文化,使其真正致力于寻求私人利益,而不会产生系统性的破坏稳定风险或以其他方式危及其客户、债权人和社会其他人的福祉。实际上,最近金融监管的“道德转向”将企业的“风险文化”重塑为危机后寻求系统性金融稳定的成败的关键决定因素。这篇文章分析了关于道德规范和文化因素在金融市场中的作用的新一轮公开辩论的主要主题,并确定了其关键的概念和规范局限性。它认为,这场辩论的主要缺陷在于,它倾向于忽视系统性、结构性因素在塑造单个公司的内部文化规范和对合法商业行为的态度方面的关键作用。文章推翻了当前学术和政策对制度文化讨论的因果关系假设,讨论了寻求在宏观而非微观层面上改变金融市场基本结构和动态的更广泛改革措施将如何深刻、更有效地改变个人和企业的规范选择和态度。因此,使金融在道德上健全的关键是使其在结构上健全——并在系统层面上做到这一点。
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
期刊介绍: Founded in 1991, the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (JLPP) has quickly risen to become one of the leading public policy journals in the nation. A fixture among the top 10 policy journals, JLPP has consistently been among the top 100 student-edited law journals. JLPP publishes articles, student notes, essays, book reviews, and other scholarly works that examine the intersections of compelling public or social policy issues and the law. As a journal of law and policy, we are a publication that not only analyzes the law but also seeks to impact its development.
×
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