failure family

harmonization and standardization failure

34 claims across 17 works.

• politically-negotiated-legal-product: The Societas Europaea has drawn a less than enthusiastic initial reaction, plausibly because its rules are the product of years of negotiation and pol
• delaware-import-nonviability: None of the Delaware based solutions, whether importing bundled or unbundled Delaware law, is likely to be viable for Europe.
• tier-1-definition-divergence: Letting national regulators keep their existing Tier 1 capital definitions creates a collective action problem: countries with stricter definitions ap
• Illusory national discretion above the recognition ceiling: Even the residual national discretion to set countercyclical buffers between 2.5 and 5 percent is misleading, because a Member State such as the Unite
• wrong-harmonious-rule: Harmonization can fail on the merits: the harmonious rule may be the wrong rule for the problem it addresses, or it may become the wrong rule later as
• harmonization-political-impossibility: Harmonization is politically unattainable absent either a central authority able to preempt the law of many jurisdictions or a single jurisdiction wit
• rogue-jurisdiction-defection: Harmonization invites its own defeat by creating an incentive for rogue jurisdictions to attract, into their legal systems, the private actors who do
• tier-1-definitional-divergence: Divergent national definitions of Tier 1 capital produce a distortion: financial institutions in countries with stricter definitions that exclude cont
• Nominal confluence: The author stipulates the term nominal confluence: legal requirements that are formally identical for mutual and hedge fund managers but that operate
• standards vacuum in private fund due diligence: Almost no guidance exists on the standards applicable to private fund investor due diligence, so despite the growing importance of due diligence in ca
• best practice materials do not supply legal standards: The existing resources fail on both sides: industry materials describe best practices without setting out the legal requirements for private fund due
• One size fits all credit risk policy prescriptions: Post LTCM proposals for clearer credit risk strategies and credit risk management policies at financial intermediaries were inappropriately applied ac
• Harmonization defeated by jurisdictional arbitrage: Proposals to improve close-out netting agreements and to harmonize standard documentation across jurisdictions are likely to run into jurisdictional a
• No applicable due diligence standards: Despite the rising relevance of investment due diligence and increasing due diligence litigation, the private fund industry is largely left to its own
• Inconsistent due diligence legal standards: The legal standards applicable to private fund investor due diligence are somewhat inconsistent and suboptimal and merit clarification.
• global regulator infeasibility: A single global financial regulator is not a serious policy option because national political interests are incoherent and cannot readily be united to
• coordination cost barrier: Coordinated international cooperation in hedge fund regulation will ultimately be hindered by administrative costs, immense transaction costs, setup c
• Issuer Based Regulatory Bifurcation: The regulation of government coins versus corporate coins versus people coins bifurcated the regulatory infrastructure for decentralized technologies,
• Standards Vacuum Market Stagnation: Because basic standards for the governance of digital assets were still missing at the beginning of the 2020s, the digital asset market stagnated and
• subsidiarity-insufficiency: The subsidiarity principle, which holds that issues should be addressed at the most immediate level consistent with their resolution, cannot by itself
• Standards Deficit Blocks Market Evolution: Without standards for digital assets it will be very difficult to increase regulatory certainty or coordinate market activity, and without regulatory
• no-governance-standard: There is no consistent standard for DAO governance, which pushes each DAO to invent its own structure, and because decentralized governance is complex
• regulatory patchwork burden: Sector specific AI regulation, though responsive to the distinctive features of each field, produces a patchwork of complex rules that is difficult fo
• federated standards divergence: A unified governance framework is hard to establish in the federated model because each participating entity maintains its own AI systems and datasets
• standards fragmentation: In the federated model of AI governance many challenges cannot easily be decentralized, because distinct entities maintain their own AI systems and da
• divergent compliance interpretation: Enforcing AI regulation in a federated model is complex because different entities may interpret the same regulations differently and may show differi
• fragmented oversight gap: The fragmented United States approach to regulating legal AI, resting on voluntary federal standards and a patchwork of state initiatives, prioritizes
• Partial coverage of existing international instruments: Existing regulatory initiatives, including the UNCITRAL Model Laws and the European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, provide only partial
• Missing dispute resolution and compliance standards: The absence of standardized protocols for dispute resolution and for compliance with regulations such as export controls hinders the scalability of to
• Harmonization eradicates innovative outliers: The most damaging effect of legal harmonization is that it eradicates outliers, meaning the unconventional approaches that actually drive technologica
• Harmonized rules lag technical evolution: Harmonized standards and innovative dispute resolution mechanisms are only partial answers, because they cannot keep pace with the continuously evolvi
• Harmonization misconstrues blockchain ethos: The authors contest the prevailing scholarly proposition that harmonized conflict of laws principles are necessary to govern digital assets across com
• Uniform standards favor centralization: A constructive balance to the inherent and unavoidable centralized character of national law cannot be achieved by imposing uniform legal standards on
• One size fits all law reduces systemic resilience: Harmonizing substantive law would suppress jurisdictional diversity by imposing a one size fits all model that ignores cultural, economic, and technol