Adaptation of domestic state governance to international governance models

The purpose of the article is to provide the evolving international trends of modern management models and authorial vision of model of state governance system in Ukraine, its subsystems, in particular, the system of provision of administrative services that is appropriate for the contemporary times. Methodology. On the basis of scientific and theoretical approaches to the definitions of terms “state governance” and “public governance”, there was an explanation of considerable difference between them and, taking into consideration, the mentality of Ukrainian society and peculiar weak side in self-organization, the authors offered to form authorial model of governance on the basis of historically traditional for Ukraine model of state governance and to add some elements of management concepts that proved their significance, efficiency and priority in practice. Results. The authors emphasized the following two prevailing modern management models in the international practice: “new state management” and “good governance”. The first concept offered for consideration served as a basis for the semantic content of state activity that reflects more the state of administrative reformation. Practical meaning. A practical introduction of management to the domestic model of governance creates the range of contradictions that do not allow implementing herein concept. Pursuant to authors, the second one allows in considerable measure to reform state governance, considering historically developed peculiarities of this model. Moreover, the involvement of concept herein into introduction of informational and communicational technologies in the process of governance eliminates the necessity of power decentralization, it allows to form real net structure and, at the same, to keep vertical power structure, to involve citizens for formation and taking of management decisions, to form electronic communicational channel of feedback, to provide citizens with electronic administrative services. All indicated advantages of the concept certify about the necessity to reform state governance exactly in this field. Meaning/ Distinction. This article raises a question about the significance of formation and sequence of state policy in Ukraine aimed at creating an information-oriented society, space, as well as informational and technological infrastructure

Net structure of subject-to-subject relations in the management of the system of administrative services provision

The purpose of the work is to form the net structure of management of the system of administrative services provision on the basis of implementation of subject-to-subject interactions between state sector and civil society. Methodology. The methodology basis for the investigation is the abstract-logical analysis of theoretical and methodological backgrounds for management of relations and interactions. For the theoretical generalization and formation of net structure, there are used scientific recommendations of Ukrainian scientists regarding the necessity to implement subject-to-subject relations in the system of administrative services provision. Results. The investigations allowed confirming that the hierarchical structure of the state governance system does not give an opportunity to implement equal interaction between a subject of provision and a subject of an appeal as these relations have one – way communication and the feedback channel has a formal character. Moreover, the civil society is not considered by state sector to be a source of methods and ways to develop the system of state governance, in particular, the management system of administrative services provision. Practical meaning. The net structure of management will allow implementing the subject-subject relations in the system, under which the actions of the subject of provision – that means state sector – will be directed to the realization of rights and interests of the subjects of appeal. In their turn, apart from the performance of all legislative responsibilities that they should perform, they can carry out activities directed to the development of management activity in the system of administrative services provision and the whole system of state governance as an integral system of management. Meaning/Distinction. The provided model of the net structure will allow involving citizens in the processes of state governance and increasing the impact of the civil sector during the making of state and management decisions and, as a result, to confirm subject-to-subject positions in the relations

Regulating Fintech in Canada and the United States: Comparison, Challenges and Opportunities

This article compares the regulatory frameworks, challenges and opportunities in financial technology (fintech) in Canada and the United States. Fintech is explored as a post 2008 global financial crisis phenomenon by reviewing the diverse interpretations of its definition, identifying its historical underpinnings, and noting industry trends and associated demand factors. The market environment, and regulatory approach, in Canada and the U.S. is not homogenous, and although there are similarities, each jurisdiction faces different challenges and opportunities. In the U.S., fintech has significant disintermediation potential, and supervisory structures exhibit fragmentation under a rules-based framework. Nevertheless, there is growing desire for principle-based regimes in the U.S., and several federal and state regulators have instituted “regulatory sandboxes.” Canada is characterized by principle-based regulation and features a robust sandbox in securities jurisdiction; yet fintech is largely being experienced as a bank-driven phenomenon, and bank-fintech partnerships are visible, as incumbents use fintech to enhance customer service and operations. Regulatory fragmentation does, however, present an entry cost for new consumer-facing firms in Canadian fintech sectors not falling within the ambit of federal financial institution oversight. Similarities and differences between the U.S. and Canada are explored in this article across multiple fintech sectors including fintech banking, cryptocurrency (cryptocurrency as money, cryptocurrency funds and derivatives, and initial coin offerings), fintech credit (peer-to-peer lending), payments, algorithmic wealth management (robo-advisors) and financial account aggregators. The article also discusses regulatory adaptations such as sandboxes; the status of large-scale financial blockchain implementation projects; the emergence of "regtech"; international regulatory coordination efforts; self-regulatory structures; systemic risk considerations; and optimal regulatory design principles, given continuing market and product complexity. Fintech presents opportunities - like lower costs, enhanced product and service scope, greater credit and financial inclusion – and unique new risks (which are explored in detail in the article) as well as challenges for regulators, such as creating laws that accurately capture new technology and keeping pace with constantly evolving innovations. Regulators must also balance encouraging innovation and competition with effective risk management and supervision

Prospects of using cryptocurrencies in the context of global financial market development

Магістерська робота присвячена дослідженню блокчейну на прикладі криптовалют. В роботі проаналізовано та порівняно підходи до регулювання первинного випуску монет (ICO) та криптовалют в розрізі країн світу. Проаналізовано сприйняття фінансового ринку та грошово-кредитної системи такого явища як криптовалюти. Досліджено обмеження технології блокчейн, які сповільнюють розвиток криптовалютного ринку. Надано рекомендації розробникам криптовалют та систем, побудованих на блокчейні на основі проаналізованих проблем.The master’s thesis focuses on research of poorly investigated issues in blockchain on the example of cryptocurrencies. Regulation approaches on ICO and cryptocurrencies turnover are also discovered. The issue of cryptocurrencies is researched through the current attitude to cryptocurrencies by financial market and monetary system. The issues of blockchain that limiting development of cryptocurrencies market are discovered. Research also provides implications on the investigated topics for cryptocurrencies and blockchain developers

The Failure of Market Efficiency

Recent years have witnessed the near total triumph of market efficiency as a regulatory goal. Policymakers regularly proclaim their devotion to ensuring efficient capital markets. Courts use market efficiency as a guiding light for crafting legal doctrine. And scholars have explored in great depth the mechanisms of market efficiency and the role of law in promoting it. There is strong evidence that, at least on some metrics, our capital markets are indeed more efficient than they have ever been. But the pursuit of efficiency has come at a cost. By focusing our attention narrowly on economic efficiency concerns—such as competition, friction, and transaction costs—we have lost sight of other, deeper values within our economic system, including wider conceptions of duty, fairness, and morality. And while regulators sometimes pay lip service to these values, they often treat them as merely a subset of efficiency: the best way to treat investors fairly, to promote equality, and to prevent immoral, exploitative behavior, in this view, is simply to create an efficient market. We have seen the consequences of this emphasis play out in spectacular fashion in the last decade. New market structures and technologies—from special purpose acquisition companies to social-media oriented trading apps to cryptocurrencies—have emerged to eliminate barriers to trade and compete with institutional incumbents. These strategies may well lead to more efficient markets insomuch as they facilitate access to capital, but they also have the side effect of placing unsophisticated individuals into complex contractual arrangements with sophisticated market actors. The result is an “efficient” market, but one with steep moral and social costs. This Article examines the limits of market efficiency as a regulatory goal and suggests a set of structural and substantive reforms aimed at better balancing efficiency with the other goals of markets. It concludes that regulators, courts, and scholars alike need to adopt a more comprehensive understanding of the proper ends of market regulation, one that emphasizes the purpose and spirit of finance over the false promise of efficiency

The Failure of Market Efficiency

Recent years have witnessed the near total triumph of market efficiency as a regulatory goal. Policymakers regularly proclaim their devotion to ensuring efficient capital markets. Courts use market efficiency as a guiding light for crafting legal doctrine. And scholars have explored in great depth the mechanisms of market efficiency and the role of law in promoting it. There is strong evidence that, at least on some metrics, our capital markets are indeed more efficient than they have ever been. But the pursuit of efficiency has come at a cost. By focusing our attention narrowly on economic efficiency concerns—such as competition, friction, and transaction costs—we have lost sight of other, deeper values within our economic system, including wider conceptions of duty, fairness, and morality. And while regulators sometimes pay lip service to these values, they often treat them as merely a subset of efficiency: the best way to treat investors fairly, to promote equality, and to prevent immoral, exploitative behavior, in this view, is simply to create an efficient market. We have seen the consequences of this emphasis play out in spectacular fashion in the last decade. New market structures and technologies—from special purpose acquisition companies to social-media oriented trading apps to cryptocurrencies—have emerged to eliminate barriers to trade and compete with institutional incumbents. These strategies may well lead to more efficient markets insomuch as they facilitate access to capital, but they also have the side effect of placing unsophisticated individuals into complex contractual arrangements with sophisticated market actors. The result is an “efficient” market, but one with steep moral and social costs. This Article examines the limits of market efficiency as a regulatory goal and suggests a set of structural and substantive reforms aimed at better balancing efficiency with the other goals of markets. It concludes that regulators, courts, and scholars alike need to adopt a more comprehensive understanding of the proper ends of market regulation, one that emphasizes the purpose and spirit of finance over the false promise of efficiency

Decentralized Finance – A Systematic Literature Review and Research Directions

Decentralized Finance (DeFi) is the (r)evolutionary movement to create a solely code-based, intermediary-independent financial system—a movement which has grown from $4bn to$104bn in assets locked in the last three years. We present the first systematic literature review of the yet fragmented DeFi research field. By identifying, analyzing, and integrating 83 peer-reviewed DeFi-related publications, our results contribute fivefold. First, we confirm the increasing growth of academic DeFi publications through systematic analysis. Second, we frame DeFi-related literature into three levels of abstraction (micro, meso, and macro) and seven subcategories. Third, we identify Ethereum as the blockchain in main academic focus. Fourth, we show that prototyping is the dominant research method applied whereas only one paper has used primary research data. Fifth, we derive four prioritized research avenues, namely concerning i) DeFi protocol interaction and aggregation platforms, ii) decentralized off-chain data integration to DeFi, iii) DeFi agents, and iv) regulation

Disassembling the Trust Machine, three cuts on the political matter of blockchain

Blockchain technology is, in part, a proposal to resolve ‘the political’ through technical means: decentralised networks to solve the problem of authority; cryptography to coordinate and secure the network; and game theory and incentive design to solve network behaviour. This PhD thesis draws on theoretical work by Karen Barad (2007) and Jacques Rancière (Rancière, 2010) to ask the question of what matters politically in blockchain technology – both in the sense of matter as becoming material of a new mediation of the political, but also mattering in the sense of being of political importance to engineers, developers and communities forming around blockchain as a potential. Rather than treating blockchain as coherent thing to be either celebrated or criticised, this thesis proposes and attempts to draw out the ways in which the potentials of blockchain are negotiated as part of its political effects, looking towards these negotiations to understand how political differences are made and sought materialised. Three approaches to the political are articulated to analyse Bitcoin and Ethereum as case studies and shift their terms of debate. Firstly, addressing the question of algorithmic determinacy, an approach is proposed for critically understanding a blockchain proposition that does not immediately revert to a competition of control between ‘human’ and ‘machine’ through the notion of the insensible, drawing on work by geographer of the inhuman Yusoff (2013a). Secondly, drawing on political theorist Rancière (2010) a particular blockchain sensibility is articulated, addressing the question of the particular kind of ‘disruption’ that blockchain presents. Its specific provenance in political histories of decentralised network computation opens up political significance beyond its intersections with financial capitalism. Finally, addressing the question of blockchain as a resolution to the political, the thesis introduces the concept of dissensible as an ongoing potential for incompatible sensibilities and their negotiation