Technologies of Risk? Regulating Online Investing in Canada*

Condon, Mary

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9930.2004.00185.x

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An important focus of these activities is the duty to manage risk. Indeed, some authors regard risk as a new mode of governance (see, e.g., Condon 2004). Some argue that risk management discourses have become very much more prominent in organizing governance, to the extent that organizational governance has become reconstituted by the idea of risk (Power 2007).…”

Section: New Modes Of Regulatory Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the New Regulatory Governance: Business Perspectives

Hutter¹

2011

Law &Amp; Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers business understandings of two of the principal features of the new regulatory governance. First, it focus on attempts to place greater responsibility for risk regulation on business and asks how well equipped they are to manage this. Second, it examines the decentering of the state and considers how business organizations view the influence of nonstate actors on their business regulation. These issues are discussed with reference to data from two different research projects in the United Kingdom. The findings question the implicit assumptions the new regulatory governance makes about how well equipped businesses are to manage the risks they generate and how able nonstate influences are to influence the full range of businesses.l apo_346 459..476

show abstract

Section: New Modes Of Regulatory Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the New Regulatory Governance: Business Perspectives

Hutter¹

2011

Law &Amp; Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some scholars even expressed concerns over whether SROs are working for the benefit of their members or serving the public interest as they so often claim to be (Brockman, 2004;Condon, 2008). An SRO that is supposed to be in charge of safeguarding the investing public, but at the same time, deflects investors' complaints away from the CJS, is tantamount to putting a fox to guard a henhouse.…”

Section: The Funnel Metaphor Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-regulation in the Canadian securities industry: Funnel in, funnel out, or funnel away?

Lokanan

2015

International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Looking at online investing in Canada, Mary Condon's paper (2004) takes further the theme of changes in the nature of regulation in the digital economy. One of the responses has been increased attention to the possibilities of using “decentered” as opposed to state‐centric approaches to regulation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Investing and the Online Consumer: State and Decentered Regulatory Responses*

Smith

2004

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spread of technology into more people's lives and the global reach of the Internet have had a profound effect on the way we do business, and it is beginning to have a tangible effect on the way we regulate. Online investing and other areas of e-commerce such as e-shopping, e-banking, and e-gambling provide fertile ground for observing these developments. This special issue focuses on online investing, and extends to these other areas in a discussion of regulatory innovation and the generic idea of the online consumer.The argument that the cyberworld is not susceptible to regulation has failed, and regulators and legislators are gradually developing a variety of responses to regulating the digital economy with online businesses. On one hand, there are relatively familiar adaptations such as extension of legal definitions to include digital modes, extraterritoriality of legislation, strengthening of intellectual property rights, and increasing investigative powers, remedies, and sanctions. On the other hand, there is a trend towards mixing statebased regulation with other modes of regulation, for example, various forms of soft law such as guidelines and codes, self-regulatory and accreditation schemes, markets, social practices, and also software "code" or architecture such as filter programs.As the contributors to this special issue show, which of these approaches is adopted or how they are married together, may depend on how the policy debate is shaped. This in turn depends partly on which narratives or discourses are thought to have the greatest explanatory charge. Does envisioning the online investor as empowered by new investment technology capture the regulatory imagination and relevant interests, or is the more persuasive view that the online investor is actually more vulnerable? How is this related to the idea of regulating to control risk, and should the online investor or consumer be protected by the pastoral power of the state, or be encouraged to be more self-reliant? What is the regulatory conversation that is most likely to carry regulatory innovation forward, where is it best located, and who should participate?

show abstract

Technologies of Risk? Regulating Online Investing in Canada*

Cited by 4 publications

References 11 publications

Understanding the New Regulatory Governance: Business Perspectives

Understanding the New Regulatory Governance: Business Perspectives

Self-regulation in the Canadian securities industry: Funnel in, funnel out, or funnel away?

Online Investing and the Online Consumer: State and Decentered Regulatory Responses*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About