Rules versus principles for ethical market behaviour
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21259811 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Patrick Honohan (0000-0003-2095-1375, Trinity College Dublin, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue | S1 |
| Pages | 34-40 |
| Publication date | 2023-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2694-6416 • E-ISSN: 2694-6424 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/beer.12407 |
| OpenAlex | W3215836190 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 8 |
In designing regulation, as has long been recognized in the academic literature, there is a tension between reliance on fixed mechanical “bright line” rules and the flexibility offered by granting a degree of discretion to the regulator subject to guiding principles. The failure of principles‐based financial regulation a decade ago reinforced a trend towards mechanical rules. This essay, drawing on practical experience gleaned in the years following the Global Financial Crisis, argues that both are needed; indeed, in many cases, the regulatory policymaker needs some discretion if it is to be sufficiently intrusive. Although regulatory discretion brings its own risks, the growing complexity of products and markets suggests a tilt towards granting greater discretion to the regulator in preference to over‐complicating mechanical rules
Business · Discretion · Economics · Law and economics · Management · Microeconomics · Political science · Preference · Regulator · Law · Regulation and Compliance Studies
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |