首页> 外文OA文献 >Tools for Regulatory Quality and Financial Sector Regulation: A Cross-Country Perspective
【2h】

Tools for Regulatory Quality and Financial Sector Regulation: A Cross-Country Perspective

机译:监管质量和金融部门监管的工具:跨国视角

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This report provides a comparative perspective on the application of quality regulation principles to financial sector regulators, in the US, Canada, Australia, the UK and France. The report compares key provisions of the codes of the Basle Committee and IOSCO, with the OECD's 2005 Guiding Principles for Regulatory Quality and Performance, and the 2009 Policy Framework for Effective and Efficient Financial Regulation (PFEEFR). The report analyses the independence and accountability of the regulators, as well as their powers. The analysis focuses on requirements for ex ante and ex post regulatory impact analyses, including burden reduction; for transparency and communication of decision making, as well as co-ordination and regulatory review; for improving the regulatory system over time and for regulating conflicts of interest. The report finds variation in the formal arrangements, and respective practices. It also finds that the requirements related to better regulation principles are often implemented too late in the decision-making process when regulations are set at the international level.
机译:本报告提供了在美国,加拿大,澳大利亚,英国和法国将质量监管原则应用于金融部门监管机构的比较观点。该报告将巴塞尔委员会和国际证监会组织守则的主要规定与经合组织的《 2005年监管质量和绩效指导原则》以及《 2009年有效和有效的金融监管政策框架》进行了比较。该报告分析了监管机构的独立性和问责制及其权力。该分析着重于事前和事后监管影响分析的要求,包括减轻负担;提高决策的透明度和沟通能力,以及协调和监管审查;以便随着时间的推移改善监管体系并解决利益冲突。该报告发现正式安排和各自的做法有所不同。它还发现,在国际一级制定法规时,与更好的法规原则相关的要求通常在决策过程中实施得太迟了。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号