Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 2008年之後全球金融治理機制的重整:規範、制度與結構
Reform of Global Financial Governance Regime Since 2008: Regulation, Institution, and Structure
Authors: 辛翠玲
Shin, Chueiling
Contributors: 問題與研究
Keywords: 全球金融治理 ; 金融監管 ; 全球治理 ; 亞投行 
Global Financial Governance ; Global Governance ; Financial Supervision ; AIIB
Date: 2019-12
Issue Date: 2020-11-16 13:42:17 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 2008年全球金融危機爆發,重挫跨國資本市場;既有全球金融治理機制備受質疑之餘,也開啟2008年之後繁複的治理機制改革之路。本研究認為2008年之後的全球金融治理機制改革有三個不同的層次:從規範、制度到結構,每個層次對於治理機制改革的重點議題與運作方式與目的各有不同的掌握。規範層次與制度層次的共同點在於皆強調在既有金融治理機制的改革;二者差別在於,規範層次專注於監理內容的補強,而制度層次側重行為者之間的互動方式與關係。較諸前二者,結構層次觀最為不同,且對既有體制的合理性有根本上的質疑。本研究藉由三個改革層次分析架構,以瞭解全球金融治理機制變遷的全貌。同時並據以觀察全球金融治理機制兩個重整階段,其中第一階段主要聚焦於規範與制度層次的改革,第二階段則出現結構層次改革的挑戰與嘗試。
This paper examines the reform of global financial governance mechanism after the global financial crisis in 2008. The research argues that three different levels of reform could be identified in order to get a thorough understanding of the governance reform during the last ten years, i.e. regulatory level, institutional level, and structural level, each of which assumes different causes to the financial crisis and prescriptions to the problematic governance mechanism reform. Regulatory reform supporters called for tightening up banking and financial supervision by adopting macro-prudential policy guideline, whereas institutionalists suggested a plurilateral approach, which aims at expanding the governance network further to include the most possibly diversified actors. While both the regulatory and institutional reform views focused on improving the existing system, structural reform proponents laid emphasis on the fundamental structural relations that constructed global financial governance. Structural reformers argue that it was the underlying unequal power distribution that led to the unleashing of the potential dangers lying in the Washington consensus which caused severe damage after the financial crisis. The paper reviews the two stages of global financial mechanism reform after 2008 China using the analytical framework and found that the first reform stage focused mainly on regulatory and institutional reform, while the second stage was more structure-oriented.
Relation: 問題與研究季刊, 58卷4期, 1-28
Data Type: article
DOI 連結:
Appears in Collections:[問題與研究 TSSCI] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
14.pdf1547KbAdobe PDF43View/Open

All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing