MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281601326

Getting Our Act Together: A Review of the Canadian Derivatives Regulatory Landscape and an Argument for a Dedicated Derivatives Regime

2010· review· en· W2281601326 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Richard Aaron Libbey

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie journal of legal studies · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Regulation and Crises
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationAmbiguityArgument (complex analysis)Scope (computer science)Derivatives marketLaw and economicsEnforcementBusinessGuardianPolitical scienceIndustrial organizationPublic economicsEconomicsLawComputer scienceFinanceFutures contract
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The volume of derivatives in the global financial system has exploded. Before the 1980s, these products were virtually unknown. As of June 2009, the notional market value of outstanding derivatives was in excess of USD $600 trillion. Regulators have been slow to act to date – and where they have acted, the legal, systemic and operational risks associated with derivative financial products have not always been properly determined or resolved. This paper explores the Canadian approach to derivatives regulation, examining its strengths and weaknesses, and looking at improvements that could be made. I argue that the outdated, disorganized and decentralized maze of laws that regulate Canada’s markets is both inefficient and ineffective. In light of the challenges posed by the rapidly evolving derivatives markets and the increasingly global economy, the current system is no longer tenable, and a reshaping of the regulatory scheme is necessary. A modern, consolidated, principles-based regulatory system will better serve investors and businesses, and will be a more effective guardian of the health of the Canadian economy. The first section of this paper explores the fine balance that must be achieved between the regulation of derivatives markets and the need to allow participants the freedom to transact and obtain the full economic benefit from derivative instruments. Section II looks into the Canadian experience with derivatives regulation, examining the sources of ambiguity, the varying provincial regimes, and the problems that have arisen with regulation. Section III suggests a way forward out of the confusion of the current Canadian regulatory system. I propose a Québec-style dedicated piece of legislation, with a principles-based approach, rooted in an ideology of the markets that takes into account the dangers of unchecked participants, and that is overseen by a national regulator as a part of a comprehensive financial regulation system. Before exploring the Canadian regulatory framework applicable to derivatives it is necessary to describe what the term “derivatives” refers to and the nature of the markets within which these financial instruments are used.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDalhousie journal of legal studiesSame topicGlobal Financial Regulation and CrisesFrench-language works237,207