技术创新对监管结构的影响:金融危机后欧洲的金融科技

Agnieszka Smoleńska, Joseph Ganderson, A. Heritier
{"title":"技术创新对监管结构的影响:金融危机后欧洲的金融科技","authors":"Agnieszka Smoleńska, Joseph Ganderson, A. Heritier","doi":"10.4337/9781839101120.00017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Specific forms of digitised financial innovation have been the subject of several chapters in this volume: Chapter 2 studied the regulation of high-frequency trading and Chapter 3 the role of clearing houses and central depositories in derivatives trading. In this chapter, we examine technological innovation more broadly and in its own right, considering its impact on European regulatory structures in recent years. How does technological innovation, or ‘Fintech’,1 in major financial markets – currencies, payment systems, capital markets, alternative intermediaries and insurance – impact upon regulation? The dynamic features of financial markets and the innovation of complex financial products and services based on new technologies and business models present regulators with significant challenges. Specifically, how can they effectively scrutinise unprecedentedly large volumes of market data? Is ‘Regtech’, an instrument developed by private actors, able to ensure compliance with public regulation? Does an alternative approach which institutionalises public–private cooperation offer answers to new regulatory challenges? New financial technologies and activities often do not fall within the purview of established regulatory regimes, leading to a situation where regulators are playing catch-up with the private sector. At the very least, this necessitates further engagement between public and private actors; at most, it calls for sweeping reforms to regulatory rules and strategies. While it is routine for regulators to encounter asymmetric information problems in interactions with firms (Besanko and Sappington 2001), these are acute in sectors such as finance where disruptive innovation can lead to a state of ‘Knightian uncertainty’, as was demonstrated by the most recent financial crisis itself (Nelson and Katzenstein 2014). A key lesson drawn from the 2008 crisis was that if","PeriodicalId":426332,"journal":{"name":"Governing Finance in Europe","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impacts of technological innovation on regulatory structure: Fintech in post-crisis Europe\",\"authors\":\"Agnieszka Smoleńska, Joseph Ganderson, A. Heritier\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/9781839101120.00017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Specific forms of digitised financial innovation have been the subject of several chapters in this volume: Chapter 2 studied the regulation of high-frequency trading and Chapter 3 the role of clearing houses and central depositories in derivatives trading. In this chapter, we examine technological innovation more broadly and in its own right, considering its impact on European regulatory structures in recent years. How does technological innovation, or ‘Fintech’,1 in major financial markets – currencies, payment systems, capital markets, alternative intermediaries and insurance – impact upon regulation? The dynamic features of financial markets and the innovation of complex financial products and services based on new technologies and business models present regulators with significant challenges. Specifically, how can they effectively scrutinise unprecedentedly large volumes of market data? Is ‘Regtech’, an instrument developed by private actors, able to ensure compliance with public regulation? Does an alternative approach which institutionalises public–private cooperation offer answers to new regulatory challenges? New financial technologies and activities often do not fall within the purview of established regulatory regimes, leading to a situation where regulators are playing catch-up with the private sector. At the very least, this necessitates further engagement between public and private actors; at most, it calls for sweeping reforms to regulatory rules and strategies. While it is routine for regulators to encounter asymmetric information problems in interactions with firms (Besanko and Sappington 2001), these are acute in sectors such as finance where disruptive innovation can lead to a state of ‘Knightian uncertainty’, as was demonstrated by the most recent financial crisis itself (Nelson and Katzenstein 2014). A key lesson drawn from the 2008 crisis was that if\",\"PeriodicalId\":426332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Governing Finance in Europe\",\"volume\":\"9 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/10.4337/9781839101120.00017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governing Finance in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839101120.00017","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

数字化金融创新的具体形式是本卷几章的主题:第2章研究了高频交易的监管,第3章研究了清算所和中央存管机构在衍生品交易中的作用。在本章中,我们更广泛地考察技术创新本身的权利,考虑到近年来它对欧洲监管结构的影响。主要金融市场(货币、支付系统、资本市场、替代中介机构和保险)中的技术创新(或“金融科技”)如何影响监管?金融市场的动态特征以及基于新技术和商业模式的复杂金融产品和服务的创新给监管机构带来了重大挑战。具体来说,他们如何有效地审查空前庞大的市场数据?“监管科技”是一种由私人行为者开发的工具,能够确保遵守公共法规吗?另一种将公私合作制度化的方法能否为新的监管挑战提供答案?新的金融技术和活动往往不属于现有监管制度的范围,导致监管机构正在追赶私营部门的局面。至少,这需要公共和私人行为体之间的进一步接触;它至多只是呼吁对监管规则和战略进行全面改革。虽然监管机构在与公司的互动中遇到信息不对称问题是常规的(Besanko和Sappington 2001),但这些问题在金融等行业很严重,因为破坏性创新可能导致“奈特不确定性”状态,正如最近的金融危机本身所证明的那样(Nelson和Katzenstein 2014)。2008年危机的一个关键教训是,如果
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The impacts of technological innovation on regulatory structure: Fintech in post-crisis Europe
Specific forms of digitised financial innovation have been the subject of several chapters in this volume: Chapter 2 studied the regulation of high-frequency trading and Chapter 3 the role of clearing houses and central depositories in derivatives trading. In this chapter, we examine technological innovation more broadly and in its own right, considering its impact on European regulatory structures in recent years. How does technological innovation, or ‘Fintech’,1 in major financial markets – currencies, payment systems, capital markets, alternative intermediaries and insurance – impact upon regulation? The dynamic features of financial markets and the innovation of complex financial products and services based on new technologies and business models present regulators with significant challenges. Specifically, how can they effectively scrutinise unprecedentedly large volumes of market data? Is ‘Regtech’, an instrument developed by private actors, able to ensure compliance with public regulation? Does an alternative approach which institutionalises public–private cooperation offer answers to new regulatory challenges? New financial technologies and activities often do not fall within the purview of established regulatory regimes, leading to a situation where regulators are playing catch-up with the private sector. At the very least, this necessitates further engagement between public and private actors; at most, it calls for sweeping reforms to regulatory rules and strategies. While it is routine for regulators to encounter asymmetric information problems in interactions with firms (Besanko and Sappington 2001), these are acute in sectors such as finance where disruptive innovation can lead to a state of ‘Knightian uncertainty’, as was demonstrated by the most recent financial crisis itself (Nelson and Katzenstein 2014). A key lesson drawn from the 2008 crisis was that if
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