Search results

In 1974, the UN General Assembly adopted a landmark resolution proclaiming the establishment of a New International Economic Order. One of the basic aims of this declaration was to enhance the voice and participation of developing countries in the international economic decision-making process based on norms of equitable governance. More than four decades have passed since its adoption. This paper aims to reflect on the past 43 years of the global financial regulatory system in light of the notion of equitable governance as envisioned by the “New International Economic Order”.

This paper surveys the global financial regulatory system from the vantage point of equitable economic governance. This discussion covers the period that comes after the 1974 UN landmark resolutions that declare the establishment of a “New International Economic Order”. The authors use qualitative and quantitative approach in this study. They use descriptive statistics and intuitive discussions of certain cases to carry the objective of the paper forward.

First, part of the development in global financial regulation manifests the establishment of informal networks that embark on global regulatory issues, while being very exclusive in their membership policies. Second, the lack of full and effective participation of developing countries in the decision-making and norm setting remains unsolved in the global financial regulatory system. Third, the shadow role of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund was of great significance in assisting the implementation of non-binding regulatory rules of international finance in developing countries despite the concerns of legitimacy and equity in the making of international standards. In sum, the global financial regulatory system that emerged in the past four decades is quite different from that aspired by the NIEO.

The declaration of NIEO coincides with the collapse of the Bretton Wood’s fixed exchange rate which in turn leads to the emergence of a new financial system and regulatory development. This period marked the proliferation of informal networks that make policy recommendations or non-binding rules with global implications. As far as the literature review goes far, this paper is the first to survey the post Bretton Wood’s period of the global financial regulatory architecture based on the tenets of the “New International Economic Order”.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the “Basel Illusion”, the belief that a model-driven quantitative approach to capital adequacy can lead to a more robust and shock-proof system. The author analyzes the Basel framework and its role as a major source of systemic risk. Furthermore, the Basel framework is unlikely to enhance the safety of the financial system and prevent future crises. As such, Basel should be scrapped and regulators should revert to a simple tangible common equity (TCE) leverage rule.

The paper aims to review the extensive existing literature and analytic approach to the problem, trying to answer the question: why Basel? The paper looks at the Basel methodology of calculating risk-weighed assets.

The paper looks at the basic reasons underlying the Basel failure: complexity, variations in measurement of risk-weighed assets across banking institutions, ability to game the system and amplification of systemic risk. The research concludes that a simple TCE leverage rule is superior to Basel in controlling systemic risk.

Further research will be needed in determining the “optimal” level of capital.

Regulators and bankers should seek simplicity in capital rules. The dubious use of quantitative models can only lead to spurious precision.

This article synthesizes an extensive body of work on the issue of bank capital to demonstrate the superiority of a simple capital rule.

The purpose of this study is to examine the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)’s response to criticism and political pressure at the time of the global financial crisis through the lens of legitimacy theory.

This study constructs a thick description about a causal mechanism between social crisis and organizational change using a process-tracing approach that combines a historical narrative and a theoretical consideration.

The IASB faced criticism of its accounting standards for financial instruments and its governance structure during the financial crisis. This criticism represented the crises of pragmatic and cultural legitimacy. Facing these legitimacy crises, the IASB adopted such legitimation strategies as normalization and restructuring to repair its legitimacy. Additionally, in these repairing processes, the IASB, as a bonus, became institutionally embedded itself in the global political arena and succeeded to strengthen its legitimacy.

The study suggests that the financial crisis had a significant impact on the standardization of transnational accounting. Indeed, the crisis was an important turning point of the IASB’s work on revising its accounting standards to reduce complexity and altering its Constitution. Moreover, the authors bridge the gaps in the literature on accounting and legitimacy by examining how the IASB used particular legitimacy repair strategies when facing its legitimacy crises

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

This paper examines the need for international regulation of financial markets and suggests the possible role that a global financial supervisor might play in providing effective regulation of international financial markets. The first part discusses the nature of systemic risk in the international financial system and the necessity for international Minimum Standards of prudential supervision for banking institutions. The second part examines the efforts of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to devise non‐binding international standards for managing systemic risk in financial markets. Recent financial crises in Asia, Russia and Latin America suggest, however, that informal efforts by international bodies such as the Basel Committee are inadequate to address the risk of systemic failure in financial systems. The third part therefore argues that efficient international financial regulation requires certain regulatory functions to be performed by a global supervisor acting in conjunction with national regulatory authorities. These functions should involve the authorisation of financial institutions, generation of rules and standards of regulatory practice, surveillance of financial markets, and coordination with national authorities in implementing and enforcing such standards.

This study explores the interrelationship between regulatory risks and strategic controls within the financial supervision architecture of an emergent global financial centre of China that embraces innovation as part of its strategic objectives.

This paper employs a longitudinal case study approach to examine the institutional dynamics of the key financial regulators in connection with the regulated financial institutions in Hong Kong before and after the financial tsunami of 2008.

First, this study reveals an organic development of a specialised financial regulatory architecture that resists transforming itself structurally despite the significant impact of externalities. Second, in this post-financial crisis analysis, regulated financial institutions swiftly respond by strengthening their risk controls through compliance with the guidelines imposed by the regulator. Institutional dynamics in influencing the implementation of risk controls through a top-down interactive mechanism are observed. Such dynamic and pertinent rapid responses induce the pursuit of optimal risk management within a regulatory framework.

This paper provides a longitudinal case study to reveal regulatory risks and strategic controls of the global financial centre of China. It unveils mitigating risk control measures in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. The study demonstrates how regulatory institutions strive to take precautionary, coercive measures such that the regulated institutions mimic and implement prudent mechanisms.

The purpose of the paper is to examine the law and how it has been utilised in fostering proper functioning of global markets within member countries and globally. The term “law” in this context refers to international law, whose primary function is to regulate activities of sovereign States and organisations created by a group of States. The Statute of the International Court of Justice 1907, which has been ratified as a treaty by all UN nations, provides the most authoritative definition of the sources of international law to date (Schachter, 1991). Under Article 38 of Statute of the International Court of Justice 1907, there four main sources of international law such as treaties, international customs, general principles of law recognised by civilised nations and judicial decisions of International Court of Justice and other internationally accepted tribunals. They are the materials and processes out of which the rules and principles regulating the international community are developed and sustained. The term “global Village” was coined by a Canadian scholar by the name of Marshall McLuhan to describe the contraction of the globe into a village because of advances in internet communication technology and increased consciousness and enhanced transport systems (McLuhan, 2003). The current “global village” is manifested by the growing interconnectedness of economies which has enhanced the ability of states to interact economically, politically and socially. It operates in a way that seems to defy common definitions such as delimitations of national borders and states. The global system has created shared synergies such as free movement of workers, capital, good and services. However, it has created varied challenges for individual states given that challenges in one part of the globe can easily navigate into the system to infest other countries including those that have nothing to do with its causes. This dichotomy is highlighted by the debt crisis in the Eurozone member countries which has been simmering since 2009 but has recently bubbled to the surface by the crisis in Greece. The challenges in Greece as well in other deeply integrated countries have not been confined within individual countries or regions but have had a domino effect farther afield due to the growing interconnectedness of economies. There are dualities in the global system manifested by the fact that developed countries are endowed with the means, and, therefore, they have requisite capacity to harness the law and markets easily as opposed to their counterparts in least developed countries (LDCs), where this leverage is non-existent. Less-developed economies are so described because they lack requisite capacity and cannot compete as efficiently as their counterpart in developed countries. This has translated into ambivalence and half-heartedness in some states attitude to embrace market discipline wholeheartedly. The foregoing challenges have been exacerbated by the tenuous legal systems, lack of robust infrastructure, oversight institutions and corruption, especially in the LDCs cohort. The paper utilises empirical data to evaluate the role of law in fostering the relationship between states and markets. In other words, are the rules governing global markets effectively working to ensure a harmonious co-existence of markets, states and various stakeholders? Can the recent global crises such as the debt crisis in Greece mean that the global village is in quandary? Is there any village that is devoid of challenges or they are part and parcel of life? The paper utilises empirical examples in both developed and developing countries to evaluate the current state of the contemporary global village in search for answers to the foregoing nagging questions.

The paper adopts a selective review approach in analysing the most appropriate materials for inclusion in its analysis. It is an empirical study based on the most recent global developments such as the global financial crisis, the debt crisis in European Union (EU) to gains insights into the interplay of the relationship between law and markets and the occasional disharmony between these two regulatory domains.

The issues examined in this paper provide significant insights into the dynamics of the global village, law and markets. It has delineated that for markets to work effectively, the state needs to remain in the loop and to keep an arm’s length relationship with the market because it will have to come in to pick the pieces when things go wrong. The law cannot be pushed to the sidelines because it will have to provide the instruments for states and markets to operate efficiently within their respective regulatory domain. There is no state, including North Korea (not as open as other economies in Asia), which can close its door entirely to markets. Experience has demonstrated that law is more than rules which govern societies but a way of life such that a society is as developed as is its legal system. The State needs to use the leverage of the law and to take centre stage for markets to remain viable and relevant. Recent crises such as the debt crisis in Greece or the global financial crisis before provide lessons for proponents of the global market system to learn so that it can proportionately distribute benefits and not challenges.

The global market system has imposed varied challenges on states at the scale never envisaged before. Some of the theoretical premises relating to the paper were based on secondary data sources and were evaluated based on a small sample of cases. The author, therefore, extrapolated that the law seems to have been relegated to the sidelines to not interfere with markets. The paper has evaluated the current global market system in the context of contemporary challenges in Europe and in other regions; it would have been better to explore examples from other regions. It is evident that the state and the market are two sides of the same coin – they are embedded in each other, and their relationship complimentary and will have to co-exist. They need to work in tandem because the market needs the state and the state needs the market. Meanwhile, both the state and the market need the law as an equalizer to ensure they are regulated according to engendered rules. It appears that the disharmony between the state and the market is because of the fusion of law and politics which often results in overlapping interests. The recent global financial crisis and the frantic efforts of EU government to bail out debt distressed countries like Greece have implied that governments will need to maintain an arms-length relationship with markets. When the state lets its hands off, literally speaking, in the author’s view, markets will veer off course.

The global system has created shared synergies such as free movement of workers, capital, good and services. However, it has created varied challenges for individual states given that challenges in one part of the globe can easily navigate into the system to infest other countries including those that have nothing to do with its causes. States and stakeholders will need to carefully evaluate the impact of global regulatory initiatives to make sure that in adopting them, they are not debased or undermined by those initiatives.

For markets to work properly, the state must remain in the loop and keep an arms-length relationship with the market because it will have to come in to pick the pieces when things go wrong. The law cannot be pushed to the sidelines because it will have to provide the instruments for states and markets to operate efficiently within their respective regulatory domain. There is no state, including North Korea (not as open as other economies in Asia), which can close its door entirely to markets. Experience has demonstrated that law is more than rules which govern societies but a way of life such that a society is as developed as is its legal system. The State needs to use the leverage of the law in providing effective regulatory oversight of markets both domestically and globally.

The paper was written on the basis of recent global crises such as the debt crisis in Greece, Europe, which were evaluated in the narrow context and are objectives of the paper.

The need for international regulation of financial markets became apparent in the mid‐1970s in response to the post‐Bretton Woods liberalisation of financial markets. The elimination of the fixed exchange rate parity with gold resulted in the privatisation of financial risk, which created pressure to eliminate controls on cross‐border capital movements and the further deregulation of financial markets. It became necessary for national regulatory authorities to promote safe and sound banking systems through the effective management of systemic risk in national markets. Similarly, the need for international standards of prudential supervision was also recognised, to prevent solvent banking institutions in one jurisdiction from losing business to less respectable institutions operating in other jurisdictions whose laws permitted cut‐rate financial services and other risky financial practices. The privatisation of financial risk also created the need for financial institutions to spread their risks over many assets and activities, which led, in turn, to a significant increase in short‐term cross‐border portfolio investment that has, in many instances, exposed capital‐importing countries to increased systemic risk due to the volatility of such investments.

Explicit barriers to international trade, investment, technology, and financial flows have been reduced considerably. As a result, “macro-liberalization” of international economic transactions has largely run its course. Now, attention needs to shift from international rules for governments to international rules dealing with the various aspects of the international operations of firms – what are called “micro-issues” in this chapter; these include, by way of example, cross-border mergers and acquisitions and international bankruptcies. Such international rules for the principal actors in international production and markets would complement (or replace) the unilateral rules that exist at the national level. International rules would set the direct parameters for certain aspects of the international activities of firms and hence provide the global governance for operating in the global production and trading spaces. This chapter exemplifies for a number of areas the state of rule-making for some micro-issues, analyzes the nature of this rule-making, and suggests a way forward. Developing international micro-regulatory frameworks of rules of the road for the various aspects of the international operations of firms in the globalizing world economy should be the new frontier of international commercial diplomacy.