Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 2,835 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 567 - Next  Jump:
2014 - SASE Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 11490 words || 
Info
1. Jonnergård, Karin. "Regulating Auditing - From Regulating of (and by) a Profession to Regulating a Product" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the SASE Annual Conference, Northwestern University and the University of Chicago, Chicago, IL USA, Jul 10, 2014 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-06-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p731916_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Regulation of auditing has historically been built on the conception of the auditor as a profession. In practical terms, this has led to regulation of the auditor as a professional, as well as a certain amount of self-regulation from the professional associations. In for example early Swedish legal texts on auditing, the personality and the reputation of the individual auditor are important basis, for both the accreditation of auditor and the trust of auditing as a governance mechanism. This is in tune with the perception of professional judgement as an important feature of professional work and a reason for professional discretion and autonomy. In this paper it is claimed that historically the idea of auditing as a professional work has been well institutionalized by both regulatory agencies and the auditors themselves through the processes and outcome of audit regulation in Sweden. However, more recently the audit has taken more and more the feature of a commodity (Suddaby & Greenwood 2001). The process of commodification has occurred by internalizing knowledge in organizational systems, procedures and commodities (Abbott 1991) implying that the ‘expertise in people’ lost in relevance. In practice this implies an emphasis on standards and procedure for auditing, rather than individual judgements or the morality of the auditor. This development is reinforced by the development of the audit industry as well as the standardization of the business society at large in the wake of the globalization.

In this paper we focus on the audit professions’ conception of auditing as a professional project or as a commodity in Sweden. We follow the discursive development of this conception between 1989 and 2011 through the writing in the professional association’s journal. Our aim is to (i) describe this development (ii) investigate into the relation between the changing conception and the regulatory processes (iii) analyse the relation between the conception of auditing and the claim for self-regulation. The objective is to reach a first understanding of how the self-understanding of different actors’ influence the regulatory conversation (Black 2001) in this area.

2014 - SASE Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 13361 words || 
Info
2. HARNAY, Sophie. "The Influence of the Economic Approaches to Regulation on Banking Regulations: A Short History of Banking Regulations" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the SASE Annual Conference, Northwestern University and the University of Chicago, Chicago, IL USA, Jul 10, 2014 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-06-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p727824_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Banking regulations have been at the core of political and economic debates since the outbreak of the current crisis. Consistent with the line initially defined by the Basel I Agreement, most of them dismiss all macro-prudential concerns and almost exclusively adopt a micro-prudential logic that has proved inefficient – or insufficient – to ensure financial stability in the recent years.
The purpose of the article is therefore to understand how the theoretical background underlying the micro-prudential orientation of banking regulations impacted on regulatory practices and how – at least partly – it may help understand the outbreak of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. The article discusses the body of theoretical and empirical knowledge framing the analysis of banking regulations and guiding them in most developed countries over the last decades, drawing a parallel between the main changes having occurred in banking regulations since the 1960’s on the one hand and the evolutions of the economic analyses of regulation over the same period on the other hand. It thus argues that the economic theories of regulation have contributed in a major way to the shaping of banking regulatory policies since the 1960’s and claims that the main evolutions in the field would never have occurred if academic micro-economists had not supported them through their research massively. In particular, we highlight the shift in thinking that takes place in the 1970’s and the explanations through which deregulatory evolutions are justified at that time. On this basis, we argue that the analytical shift from the public interest theory of regulation that prevailed until the late 1960s toward the private interest theory of regulation accounts for the substitution of macro-prudential regulations for micro-prudential ones, leading to a change in the conception of the duties of banking authorities and their instruments. We then claim that, albeit the outcome of a bunch of various factors, the 2007-2008 crises can also be explained as a consequence of the economic analysis of banking regulations having supported micro-prudential regulations and self-regulation that have failed to take into account the global features and impact of banking activities and have therefore proved unable to recommend efficient solutions in a crisis context.
The article is organized as follows. First, we study how the shift from the public interest theory of regulation inspired by welfare economics toward the private interest theory of regulation in the 1960’s and 1970’s impacted on banking regulations and provided an intellectual basis for the deregulation of the banking industry. Second, we show how the development of the economics of information and the new importance devoted to the notions of asymmetric information and incentives leads to a new paradigm in the economic analyses of regulation in the 1980’s, therefore impacting on the re-regulation process at work in the banking industry. Third, we suggest that the current debates on banking regulations following the 2007-2008 financial turmoil may be interpreted to some extent as a revival of the public interest regulation in the field of banking regulation.

Keywords: banking regulations, public interest theory of regulation, private interest theory of regulation

JEL Codes: B26, G28, K23

2014 - ISTR 11th Annual Conference Words: 805 words || 
Info
3. Dunn, Alison. "Calm seas or choppy waters ahead? Balancing charity statutory regulation, co-regulation and self-regulation in the UK" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISTR 11th Annual Conference, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany, <Not Available>. 2019-06-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p708903_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: Research problem and aim of research
In recent years different patterns of regulation and nonprofit organizations have developed. The first decade of this century saw a strong preference for the creation or enhancement of charity regulatory frameworks based on overarching regulator-based supervisory control, evidenced in New Zealand (2005), Scotland (2005), England/ Wales (2006), Northern Ireland (2008) and Ireland (2009). The mid-2000s also saw the emergence of greater community based self-regulation or co-regulation in the UK (2007) and Ireland (2008). Both patterns have been at work in China; first strong state regulation to the virtual exclusion of self-regulation, and now a more nuanced and related development of the two, though, of course, state regulation remains in the ascendency. Change is afoot once more as some countries press ahead with new central regulators (Australia), others retrenching by dismantling independent regulators in favour of direct state controls (New Zealand), failing to commence legislation intended to create independent statutory agencies (Ireland), continuing a long-standing pattern of dual or more control mechanisms over nonprofits, both regulatory and self-regulatory (and more than one each, as in the USA), witnessing the emergence of self-regulatory frameworks (though not independent regulators) in a state-dominated framework (China), or the emergence of competing self-regulatory initiatives in a state-centered federal framework (India).

The research aims in this paper and all panel papers are to analyse the rationales for these developments and consider whether there is a systematic base to these seemingly conflicting approaches. These issues will be explored by considering the diverse range of catalysts that drive such policy and legal change and range from political, ideological and fiscal-based concerns through to concerns brought to the fore by global events. This exploration will sit alongside an examination of the pressures existing within the nonprofit sector itself, including concerns with autonomy and voice, and the influence these have on nonprofit law and policy.

In so doing the specific focus of this paper will be upon the UK: In the UK context there is a growing movement towards greater co-regulation and self-regulation of the charity sector. Of the UK jurisdictions, the debate on co-regulation and self-regulation is more pronounced in England and Wales as a result of Lord Hodgson's Review of the Charities Act 2006, the Public Administration Select Committee Report (2013) and forthcoming Law Commission review of charity law (to be published 2014). This movement across the UK has a number of influences which have converged to make the moment propitious for regulatory reform. These influences include fiscal concerns as a result of budgetary cuts to sector regulators, political imperatives driving accountability and transparency in the sector, broader regulatory trends driving the concepts of risk-based regulation (and its short-comings) and better quality regulation, and trends within the European Union towards developing self-regulation in the non-profit sectors.

Research questions
The following research questions will be addressed:
1. What are the key state regulatory and self-regulatory initiatives and trends directly affecting the nonprofit sector in each country currently and in recent history?
2. How, if at all, have these state regulatory and self-regulatory initiatives affected or impacted upon each other?
3. Has there been a direct, indirect or causal link between the ‘success’ or ‘failure’ of state regulation and the emergence, or lack of emergence, of self-regulation and vice versa?
4. What is the relationship between the state and the nonprofit sector in each country and is there a wider political and/or nonprofit sector agenda to the development, or lack of development, of state regulation and self-regulation in each country?

Theories/concepts informing the research
This paper and all panel papers will be informed by an analysis of theories and concepts of regulation and regulatory oversight, the drivers for regulatory mechanisms and regulatory reform and the theories and concepts which inform the interrelationship of and balance between state regulation, self-regulation and co-regulation.

Research methodology and design, key theoretical/empirical findings
This paper and all panel papers will focus on presenting information on the thematic trends and ideological, political and fiscal contexts for the balance of statutory and non-statutory regulation of nonprofit organizations in local, state, national and international contexts. Where appropriate to individual papers, there will be a comparison across national contexts, drawing conclusions both on the nature and extent of state-regulation and self-regulation of nonprofit organizations as well as the consequences that can occur when the balance of that regulation changes.

The key theoretical findings from this paper and all panel papers will focus on the forms of and drivers for state regulation and self-regulation of nonprofit organizations and the inter-relationship between the two. The empirical findings from each country considered in the papers will inform consideration of the broader thesis of the Panel project, which is whether regulatory intervention in the nonprofit sector occurs in waves.

2005 - The Midwest Political Science Association Words: 34 words || 
Info
4. Rodine, Kirsten. "Regulating the Information Economy in the New Europe: Who Regulates the Regulators?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Midwest Political Science Association, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, Illinois, Apr 07, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-06-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p86657_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Why did European countries form two separate yet overlapping networks of independent telecommunications regulators? I argue that these networks constitute an importance compromise between governance on the European level and within member states.

2009 - Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference Words: 171 words || 
Info
5. Kay, William. and Eijmberts, eijmbert.jJohannes. "Regulating Emerging Technologies; What Regulators of Nanotechnology Today May Learn from The Regulation of Nuclear Fission since the 1950s." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2019-06-25 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p362616_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Nanotechnology is an emerging technology holding great promises for the future by introducing nanoscale devices (smaller than 1-9th meter) for medical, computing, and manufacturing applications. Currently nanotechnology poses serious challenges to government regulators. After 1945, the American government moved to develop nuclear fission technology for civilian purposes. Congress established the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to oversee the promotion and regulation of atomic power in the United States. In the following decades the AEC struggled to build new government capacity to fulfill its dual mandate while nuclear science kept advancing rapidly and the assessment of the risks associated with nuclear power continued to produce new insights - thus forcing the AEC to constantly adapt to new findings. The research presented is a case study drawing from the experiences of the AEC in building capacity to simultaneously promote and regulate an emerging technology, while technological progress is ongoing. The paper holds lessons of the AEC for government agencies involved in the promotion and regulation of nanotechnology today. Research supported by NSF award 0425826.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 567 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy