Search

Modern financial regulation has predominantly been economically-driven,1 progressing from addressing market failures to making markets more competitive and work better.2 The UK Financial Conduct Authority is expressly mandated to pursue regulatory objectives that maintain market integrity and protect consumers (addressing market failures) and to promote competition (making markets work better).3 Both the FCA and its sister regulator, the Prudential Regulation Authority (for banks), have recently adopted innovative regulatory initiatives to promote technologically-driven innovation, aimed at making markets work better. These initiatives are also a response to the recent explosion of technologically-led financial innovation outside of the regulatory perimeter.In promoting financial innovation, we argue that the regulators have insufficiently focused on the need to govern financial innovation more generally. Although this concern may seem premature, the regulatory innovations are increasingly extending the perimeter for regulatory oversight of financial innovations. As the regulatory innovations have the potential to develop into more mature regulatory frameworks for governing financial innovation, we argue that regulators should manage the risks of their current approach and develop a regulatory strategy framework for balancing regulatory objectives and developing regulatory policy. We propose a framework anchored in rationality, consistency and accountability in governing financial innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The development of global standards has led to a convergence in domestic regulations in the financial services sectors. Principles-based regulations (PBRs) have become essential for effective regulatory efforts in insurance and other financial services because of their flexibility, support for regulatory efficiency and the development of a good compliance culture amongst the regulated. The legal framework of the Nigerian insurance industry mainly contains prescriptive and performance-based regimes that have become ineffective as regulatory strategies. This article recommends the adoption of PBRs from available models found in international standard setting organizations such as the International Association of Insurance Supervisors, other jurisdictions such as the UK's Prudential Regulation Authority and Financial Conduct Authority, together with international trade regimes such as the General Agreement on Trade in Services. It reviews aspects of Nigerian insurance industry regulations supporting PBRs and highlights laws not supportive of PBRs and therefore requiring reform. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]