The Future of Reporting: Whistleblower 2.0
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Following our research, we conducted a roundtable with professionals from both the U.S. and Canada involved in the SEC, CFTC, as well as the OSC’s whistleblower programs including a former SEC Commissioner, Directors of the OSC, OSC members specifically from the Office of the Whistleblower, and prominent lawyers involved in this area of work. Our project outlines our research findings combined with these discussions. We begin by outlining the U.S. programs, including the SEC and CFTC programs, which date back to the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act. Focusing specifically on the SEC’s program, whistleblowers receive awards based on information that leads to successful enforcement actions and receive protection against retaliation. There are awards specific to this program, including a 10-30% discretionary award payment of the amount collected, as well as a 30% presumption on awards that do not exceed $5 million. The OSC program, while one the best in the world, lags behind the progress made in the U.S. It was proposed that there is great potential to marry the Canadian and U.S. programs, as there is significant overlap in enforcement and in the companies at issue. However, there are notable differences between the countries that may prevent the programs from ever being fully reconcilable, including a fragmented securities regulatory framework in Canada, smaller Canadian capital markets, and cultural differences that may impact the efficacy of program incentives. With Ontario having the sole paid whistleblower program in Canada, some awards specific to this program include the 5-15% discretionary award payment of the amount collected, no presumption in place to be on the higher end, as well as a $1.5 million cap placed on awards. The paper shall provide an overview of the questions discussed during the roundtable. The questions revolved around potential promising changes to the OSC’s whistleblower program, including ideas to enhance financial incentives, retaliation provisions, use of internal compliance systems, and related actions. The OSC also discussed the importance of a whistleblower bar in Ontario and ways this could be made possible. Our paper concluded with a discussion of potential areas of future research, including discussion with behavioural science colleagues to understand how prominent a role the “classic Canadian culture” should play in the whistleblower reform, as well as collaboration with the Vancouver Anti-Corruption Institute who, in 2022, hosted a major conference on Whistleblowers and Public Integrity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,032 | 0,095 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,039 | 0,022 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,079 | 0,018 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».