数字时代衍生品交易所的执法活动效果如何?从人类视角看执法通知调查

IF 2 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1108/jfrc-08-2023-0132
Alexander Conrad Culley
{"title":"数字时代衍生品交易所的执法活动效果如何?从人类视角看执法通知调查","authors":"Alexander Conrad Culley","doi":"10.1108/jfrc-08-2023-0132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the effectiveness of four derivative exchanges’ enforcement efforts since 2007. These exchanges include the Commodity Exchange Inc. and ICE Futures US from the United States and ICE Futures Europe and the London Metal Exchange from the UK.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The paper examines 799 enforcement notices published by four exchanges through a behavioural science lens: HUMANS conceived by Hunt (2023) in <em>Humanizing Rules: Bringing Behavioural Science to Ethics and Compliance</em>.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The paper finds the effectiveness of the exchanges’ enforcement efforts to be a mixed picture as financial markets transition from the digital to artificial intelligence era. Humans remain a key cog in the wheel of market participants’ trading operations, albeit their roles have changed. Despite this, some elements of exchanges’ enforcement regimes have not kept pace with the move from floor to remote trading. However, in other respects, their efforts are or should be, effective, at least in behavioural terms.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>The paper’s findings are arguably limited to exchanges based in Anglophone jurisdictions. The information published by the exchanges is variable, making “like-for-like” comparisons difficult in some areas.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>The paper makes several recommendations that, if adopted, could help exchanges to increase the potency of their enforcement programmes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>A key aim of the paper is to shift the lens through which the debate concerning the efficacy of exchange-level oversight is conducted. Hitherto, a legal lens has been used, whereas this paper uses a behavioural lens.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":44814,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How effective are the enforcement activities of derivatives exchanges in the digital age? A survey of enforcement notices through the lens of humans\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Conrad Culley\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jfrc-08-2023-0132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the effectiveness of four derivative exchanges’ enforcement efforts since 2007. These exchanges include the Commodity Exchange Inc. and ICE Futures US from the United States and ICE Futures Europe and the London Metal Exchange from the UK.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>The paper examines 799 enforcement notices published by four exchanges through a behavioural science lens: HUMANS conceived by Hunt (2023) in <em>Humanizing Rules: Bringing Behavioural Science to Ethics and Compliance</em>.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The paper finds the effectiveness of the exchanges’ enforcement efforts to be a mixed picture as financial markets transition from the digital to artificial intelligence era. Humans remain a key cog in the wheel of market participants’ trading operations, albeit their roles have changed. Despite this, some elements of exchanges’ enforcement regimes have not kept pace with the move from floor to remote trading. However, in other respects, their efforts are or should be, effective, at least in behavioural terms.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>The paper’s findings are arguably limited to exchanges based in Anglophone jurisdictions. The information published by the exchanges is variable, making “like-for-like” comparisons difficult in some areas.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\\n<p>The paper makes several recommendations that, if adopted, could help exchanges to increase the potency of their enforcement programmes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>A key aim of the paper is to shift the lens through which the debate concerning the efficacy of exchange-level oversight is conducted. Hitherto, a legal lens has been used, whereas this paper uses a behavioural lens.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":44814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-08-2023-0132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-08-2023-0132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在研究四家衍生品交易所自 2007 年以来的执法成效。这些交易所包括美国的商品交易所和 ICE Futures US,以及英国的 ICE Futures Europe 和 London Metal Exchange:Hunt (2023) 在《规则人性化》一书中提出的 "HUMANS "概念:研究结果本文发现,随着金融市场从数字时代过渡到人工智能时代,交易所执法工作的有效性喜忧参半。人类仍然是市场参与者交易操作中的关键齿轮,尽管他们的角色已经发生了变化。尽管如此,交易所执法制度中的某些内容并未跟上从场内交易向远程交易转变的步伐。然而,在其他方面,它们的努力是有效的,或者应该是有效的,至少在行为方面是有效的。研究局限/影响本文的研究结果可以说仅限于英语国家的交易所。本文提出了几项建议,如果得到采纳,将有助于交易所提高其执法计划的效力。原创性/价值本文的主要目的是转换视角,使有关交易所层面监督效力的辩论得以进行。迄今为止,人们一直使用法律视角,而本文则使用行为视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How effective are the enforcement activities of derivatives exchanges in the digital age? A survey of enforcement notices through the lens of humans

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the effectiveness of four derivative exchanges’ enforcement efforts since 2007. These exchanges include the Commodity Exchange Inc. and ICE Futures US from the United States and ICE Futures Europe and the London Metal Exchange from the UK.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper examines 799 enforcement notices published by four exchanges through a behavioural science lens: HUMANS conceived by Hunt (2023) in Humanizing Rules: Bringing Behavioural Science to Ethics and Compliance.

Findings

The paper finds the effectiveness of the exchanges’ enforcement efforts to be a mixed picture as financial markets transition from the digital to artificial intelligence era. Humans remain a key cog in the wheel of market participants’ trading operations, albeit their roles have changed. Despite this, some elements of exchanges’ enforcement regimes have not kept pace with the move from floor to remote trading. However, in other respects, their efforts are or should be, effective, at least in behavioural terms.

Research limitations/implications

The paper’s findings are arguably limited to exchanges based in Anglophone jurisdictions. The information published by the exchanges is variable, making “like-for-like” comparisons difficult in some areas.

Practical implications

The paper makes several recommendations that, if adopted, could help exchanges to increase the potency of their enforcement programmes.

Originality/value

A key aim of the paper is to shift the lens through which the debate concerning the efficacy of exchange-level oversight is conducted. Hitherto, a legal lens has been used, whereas this paper uses a behavioural lens.

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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1992, the Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance has provided an authoritative and scholarly platform for international research in financial regulation and compliance. The journal is at the intersection between academic research and the practice of financial regulation, with distinguished past authors including senior regulators, central bankers and even a Prime Minister. Financial crises, predatory practices, internationalization and integration, the increased use of technology and financial innovation are just some of the changes and issues that contemporary financial regulators are grappling with. These challenges and changes hold profound implications for regulation and compliance, ranging from macro-prudential to consumer protection policies. The journal seeks to illuminate these issues, is pluralistic in approach and invites scholarly papers using any appropriate methodology. Accordingly, the journal welcomes submissions from finance, law, economics and interdisciplinary perspectives. A broad spectrum of research styles, sources of information and topics (e.g. banking laws and regulations, stock market and cross border regulation, risk assessment and management, training and competence, competition law, case law, compliance and regulatory updates and guidelines) are appropriate. All submissions are double-blind refereed and judged on academic rigour, originality, quality of exposition and relevance to policy and practice. Once accepted, individual articles are typeset, proofed and published online as the Version of Record within an average of 32 days, so that articles can be downloaded and cited earlier.
期刊最新文献
CBDCs, regulated stablecoins and tokenized traditional assets under the Basel Committee rules on cryptoassets All are interesting to invest, I fear of missing out (FOMO): a comparative study among self-employed and salaried investors A law and economic analysis of trading through dark pools Financial liberalisation and illicit financial outflows in African countries: does institutional quality and macroeconomic stability matter? Crossing the lines a human approach to improving the effectiveness of the three lines model in practice
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1