肯尼亚的金融科技信贷:战略监管案例

Dr. Arnold Wanjala Namusonge
{"title":"肯尼亚的金融科技信贷:战略监管案例","authors":"Dr. Arnold Wanjala Namusonge","doi":"10.47191/afmj/v7i5.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study sought to present the case for strategic regulation in the Fintech Sector, specifically in digital credit, with reference to Kenya. This was based on the concern that the proposed regulation on Fintech Credit by the Kenyan Parliament and the Government of Kenya does not factor in the sustainability aspects of Fintech Credit businesses. The study is anchored on the Public Interest Theory, the Private Interest Theory, and the Economic Theory of Regulation. The study adopted desk research, which depended on the review and examination of primary data sources such as legislation, government policy documents, acts of parliament, and reports. The study sought to achieve its objectives by evaluating the current laws and regulations affecting mobile lending in Kenya. It then relied on a comparison with two jurisdictions, specifically India and USA, where one has an existing mobile lending regulatory framework, and the other has a general regulatory framework respectively. It was established that the proposed regulations have a bias toward consumer protection and do not focus on business sustainability. The study, therefore, concluded that one single regulatory framework or laws will be insufficient for a sector where the laws in place will always be one step behind innovation in Fintech credit, and observed the need for a strategic approach to the regulation of Fintech credit in Kenya. It was recommended that, Fintech credit regulation in Kenya ought to incorporate a degree of flexibility. This flexibility is envisaged by Regtech, which takes care of new product-specific regulations. Secondly, regulators in Kenya should engage in Fintech Credit promotion by creating regulatory sandboxes. Sandboxes allow innovators to test their concepts in a deregulated environment that the rest of the market does not enjoy.","PeriodicalId":208291,"journal":{"name":"Account and Financial Management Journal","volume":"189 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fintech Credit in Kenya: The Case for Strategic Regulation\",\"authors\":\"Dr. Arnold Wanjala Namusonge\",\"doi\":\"10.47191/afmj/v7i5.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study sought to present the case for strategic regulation in the Fintech Sector, specifically in digital credit, with reference to Kenya. This was based on the concern that the proposed regulation on Fintech Credit by the Kenyan Parliament and the Government of Kenya does not factor in the sustainability aspects of Fintech Credit businesses. The study is anchored on the Public Interest Theory, the Private Interest Theory, and the Economic Theory of Regulation. The study adopted desk research, which depended on the review and examination of primary data sources such as legislation, government policy documents, acts of parliament, and reports. The study sought to achieve its objectives by evaluating the current laws and regulations affecting mobile lending in Kenya. It then relied on a comparison with two jurisdictions, specifically India and USA, where one has an existing mobile lending regulatory framework, and the other has a general regulatory framework respectively. It was established that the proposed regulations have a bias toward consumer protection and do not focus on business sustainability. The study, therefore, concluded that one single regulatory framework or laws will be insufficient for a sector where the laws in place will always be one step behind innovation in Fintech credit, and observed the need for a strategic approach to the regulation of Fintech credit in Kenya. It was recommended that, Fintech credit regulation in Kenya ought to incorporate a degree of flexibility. This flexibility is envisaged by Regtech, which takes care of new product-specific regulations. Secondly, regulators in Kenya should engage in Fintech Credit promotion by creating regulatory sandboxes. Sandboxes allow innovators to test their concepts in a deregulated environment that the rest of the market does not enjoy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":208291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Account and Financial Management Journal\",\"volume\":\"189 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Account and Financial Management Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47191/afmj/v7i5.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Account and Financial Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47191/afmj/v7i5.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究试图以肯尼亚为例,介绍金融科技领域(特别是数字信贷领域)的战略监管案例。这是基于对肯尼亚议会和肯尼亚政府提出的金融科技信贷监管提案没有考虑到金融科技信贷业务的可持续性方面的担忧。本研究以公共利益理论、私人利益理论和管制经济理论为基础。这项研究采用了案头研究,这依赖于对主要数据来源的审查和检查,如立法、政府政策文件、议会法案和报告。这项研究试图通过评估影响肯尼亚移动贷款的现行法律法规来实现其目标。然后,它依赖于与两个司法管辖区的比较,特别是印度和美国,其中一个有现有的移动贷款监管框架,另一个分别有一般的监管框架。已经确定的是,拟议的法规有偏向于保护消费者,而不是关注企业的可持续性。因此,该研究得出的结论是,对于一个现有法律总是落后于金融科技信贷创新一步的行业来说,单一的监管框架或法律是不够的,并指出需要采取战略方法来监管肯尼亚的金融科技信贷。有人建议,肯尼亚的金融科技信贷监管应该具有一定程度的灵活性。这种灵活性是由Regtech设想的,它负责新的特定产品法规。其次,肯尼亚的监管机构应该通过创建监管沙箱来促进金融科技信贷。沙盒允许创新者在放松管制的环境中测试他们的概念,而其他市场并不享受这种环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fintech Credit in Kenya: The Case for Strategic Regulation
The study sought to present the case for strategic regulation in the Fintech Sector, specifically in digital credit, with reference to Kenya. This was based on the concern that the proposed regulation on Fintech Credit by the Kenyan Parliament and the Government of Kenya does not factor in the sustainability aspects of Fintech Credit businesses. The study is anchored on the Public Interest Theory, the Private Interest Theory, and the Economic Theory of Regulation. The study adopted desk research, which depended on the review and examination of primary data sources such as legislation, government policy documents, acts of parliament, and reports. The study sought to achieve its objectives by evaluating the current laws and regulations affecting mobile lending in Kenya. It then relied on a comparison with two jurisdictions, specifically India and USA, where one has an existing mobile lending regulatory framework, and the other has a general regulatory framework respectively. It was established that the proposed regulations have a bias toward consumer protection and do not focus on business sustainability. The study, therefore, concluded that one single regulatory framework or laws will be insufficient for a sector where the laws in place will always be one step behind innovation in Fintech credit, and observed the need for a strategic approach to the regulation of Fintech credit in Kenya. It was recommended that, Fintech credit regulation in Kenya ought to incorporate a degree of flexibility. This flexibility is envisaged by Regtech, which takes care of new product-specific regulations. Secondly, regulators in Kenya should engage in Fintech Credit promotion by creating regulatory sandboxes. Sandboxes allow innovators to test their concepts in a deregulated environment that the rest of the market does not enjoy.
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