Regulating FinTech: The perspectives of law, economics, and technology

FinTech (financial technology, ‘‘FinTech’’) is a double-edged sword as it brings both benefits and risks. This study appraised FinTech’s technological nature that brings changes in complexity in modern financial markets to identify the information deficits and its undesirable outcomes. Besides, as FinTech is still developing, the information regarding, for instance, whether and how to apply regulation may be insufficient for both regulators and those regulated. More one-size-fits-all regulation might accordingly be adopted, thereby resulting in the adverse selection. Through the lens of both law and economics and law and technology, this study suggested AFR (adaptive financial regulation, ‘‘AFR’’) of FinTech to solve the underlying pacing issue. AFR is dynamic, enabling regulatory adjustments and learning. Exploring and collecting information through experiments and learning from experiments are the core of AFR. FinTech regulatory sandboxes epitomize AFR. This study chose Taiwan as a case study. This study found several barriers to adaptive and effective FinTech regulation. Unduly emphasizing consumer protection and the innovation entry criterion by improperly imposing limits on the entry into sandboxes, ignoring post-sandbox mechanisms, and relying on detailed, specific and prescriptive rules to formulate sandboxes are examples. To solve these barriers, this study proposed several solutions by looking into the experiences in other jurisdictions and analyzing. First, striking a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring financial stability and consumer protection is indispensable. Second, entry to sandboxes should be facilitated by improving the selection criteria. Third, adhering to realizing regulatory adjustment and learning to adapt regulation to technology, this study argued that systematic post-sandbox mechanisms should be established. Fourth, this study recommended “more principles-based sandboxes”. Principles rather than rules should be the base on which sandboxes or FinTech regulation are established. Having principles could provide more flexibility, being easier to adjust and adapt, and better at avoiding.

Dynamic food systems and climate-induced risks transmission for food and nutritional security

Agriculture market instability impedes achieving the global goal of sustainable and resilient food systems. Currently, the support to producers reaches the mammoth USD 540 billion a year and is projected to reach USD 1.8 trillion by 2030. This gigantic increase requires a repurposing agricultural support strategy (RASS), considering the market country-specific circumstances. These circumstances may vary with geographic locations, marketing structures, and product value chains. The fruit production system is crucial for health-conscious consumers and profit-oriented producers for food and nutritional security. Export is one of the main driving forces behind the expansion of the fruit sector, and during the year 2010-2018, trade significantly outpaced production increases. The previous literature states that irregular and unpredictable behaviour — Chaos — can arise from entirely rational economic decision-making within markets. Different markets' direct/indirect linkages through trade create trade hubs, and uncertainty may function as an avenue to transmit adverse shocks and increase vulnerability rather than contribute to resilience. Therefore, distinguishing Chaos into an endogenous and exogenous pattern of behaviour is cradled to formulate an effective RASS for resilient food systems and to understand global food crises. The present research is aimed at studying the market dynamics of three regional trade hubs, i.e., Brazil (South America), Italy (Europe), and Pakistan (Asia), each representing advanced to traditional value chains to control uncertainty (risks). The present research encompasses 1) a systematic review to highlight the research dynamism and identify grey-areas of research. Based on the findings, we have investigated the 2) nonlinear impacts of climate-induced price responsiveness in monopsony markets. Once we highlighted the importance of marketing structures/arrangements, 3) we developed a risk transmission framework to address the co-evolving impacts in complex dynamic interactions.