企业风险管理规制:澳大利亚、德国和美国的比较分析

Nicolai Bledow, Remmer Sassen, S. Wei
{"title":"企业风险管理规制:澳大利亚、德国和美国的比较分析","authors":"Nicolai Bledow, Remmer Sassen, S. Wei","doi":"10.1504/IJCM.2019.100856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Enterprise risk management (ERM) has become a ubiquitous strategy, especially among international corporate governance regulations. This paper aims to examine the level of risk management regulation through an international comparison approach. Specifically, from a corporate governance perspective, we investigate the Australian risk management regulations and compare it to the regulations of the USA and Germany. We find clear differences in each country's approach, with the USA having the highest level of regulation, followed by Australia and finally Germany. This implies that the level of regulation depends on country-specific characteristics and that the strict regulations of the SOX have led to a high level of regulation. From a management perspective, it seems to be recommendable to harmonise the respective international regulations in order to provide multinational corporations with similar requirements across different countries. Accordingly, this paper proposes multilateral collaboration in harmonizing international ERM regulations in order to avoid that firms take unnecessary risks. As a consequence, this harmonization stabilizes in turn the global financial system.","PeriodicalId":191197,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Management","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation of enterprise risk management: a comparative analysis of Australia, Germany and the USA\",\"authors\":\"Nicolai Bledow, Remmer Sassen, S. Wei\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJCM.2019.100856\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Enterprise risk management (ERM) has become a ubiquitous strategy, especially among international corporate governance regulations. This paper aims to examine the level of risk management regulation through an international comparison approach. Specifically, from a corporate governance perspective, we investigate the Australian risk management regulations and compare it to the regulations of the USA and Germany. We find clear differences in each country's approach, with the USA having the highest level of regulation, followed by Australia and finally Germany. This implies that the level of regulation depends on country-specific characteristics and that the strict regulations of the SOX have led to a high level of regulation. From a management perspective, it seems to be recommendable to harmonise the respective international regulations in order to provide multinational corporations with similar requirements across different countries. Accordingly, this paper proposes multilateral collaboration in harmonizing international ERM regulations in order to avoid that firms take unnecessary risks. As a consequence, this harmonization stabilizes in turn the global financial system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":191197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Comparative Management\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Comparative Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCM.2019.100856\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCM.2019.100856","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

企业风险管理(ERM)已成为一种普遍存在的策略,特别是在国际公司治理法规中。本文旨在通过国际比较的方法来检验风险管理监管的水平。具体而言,我们从公司治理的角度考察了澳大利亚的风险管理法规,并将其与美国和德国的法规进行了比较。我们发现每个国家的做法存在明显差异,美国的监管水平最高,其次是澳大利亚,最后是德国。这意味着监管水平取决于国家的具体特征,SOX的严格监管导致了高水平的监管。从管理的角度来看,似乎建议协调各自的国际法规,以便为跨国公司提供不同国家的类似要求。因此,本文建议通过多边合作来协调国际ERM规则,以避免企业承担不必要的风险。因此,这种协调反过来又稳定了全球金融体系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation of enterprise risk management: a comparative analysis of Australia, Germany and the USA
Enterprise risk management (ERM) has become a ubiquitous strategy, especially among international corporate governance regulations. This paper aims to examine the level of risk management regulation through an international comparison approach. Specifically, from a corporate governance perspective, we investigate the Australian risk management regulations and compare it to the regulations of the USA and Germany. We find clear differences in each country's approach, with the USA having the highest level of regulation, followed by Australia and finally Germany. This implies that the level of regulation depends on country-specific characteristics and that the strict regulations of the SOX have led to a high level of regulation. From a management perspective, it seems to be recommendable to harmonise the respective international regulations in order to provide multinational corporations with similar requirements across different countries. Accordingly, this paper proposes multilateral collaboration in harmonizing international ERM regulations in order to avoid that firms take unnecessary risks. As a consequence, this harmonization stabilizes in turn the global financial system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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