1856 (12) To [John Linnell ]

Palmer, Samuel; Palmer, Thomas; Lister, Raymond

doi:10.1093/oseo/instance.00194333

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most fundamentally, DID expressly assumed a model of behavior by firms that was simply flawed. Its underlying premise was that institutions that it supervised were sophisticated, had access to further capital or solvency support, and had well‐developed and well‐documented internal controls and regulatory compliance systems (Palmer Report 2002: para. 8.5.2–5; Australia.…”

Section: Risk‐based Regulation and The Australian Prudential Regmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…24.1.7, reprinting APRA internal memos). Palmer argued that while this might have been appropriate for some of the regulated institutions, it resulted in a supervisory approach that was inadequate to detect whether or not an institution did fit this premise, and to deal with it if it did (Palmer Report 2002: paras. 8.5.6–8).…”

Section: Risk‐based Regulation and The Australian Prudential Regmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing Regulatory Risks and Defining the Parameters of Blame: A Focus on the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority

Black

2005

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk-based regulation is a new arrival in the lexicon of risk and regulation. Regulatorsin Australia, Canada, and the UK have begun developing systems and processes to assess the probability and impact of compliance failures by regulated firms, and to adjust their relationship with firms accordingly. This article explores the motivations for, and key elements of, the risk-based frameworks of one of those regulators, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA). It broadens out from this case study to argue first, that risk-based regulation goes hand in hand with the technique of "meta" regulation, the regulation of the firm's own internal self regulation, and will both fuel and be fueled by any trend towards the latter. Second, it argues that risk-based frameworks are not risk-free: whilst they seek to manage risks they inevitably introduce their own. Third, risk-based regulatory frameworks have the potential both to expose and obscure key sociopolitical and socioeconomic choices as to the amount or types of regulatory failures that an agency will tolerate, and which in effect it is requiring society to tolerate. "Risk based frameworks" are attempt to define what are acceptable "failures" and what are not, and thus to define the parameters of blame.

show abstract

Section: Risk‐based Regulation and The Australian Prudential Regmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk‐based Regulation and The Australian Prudential Regmentioning

confidence: 99%