Search Results

Following the financial crisis and personnel changes at the US SEC, the prospect of adoption of IFRSs in the United States began to fade. This brought other jurisdictions, which had formed their policies in anticipation of a US adoption, to reconsider their approach to IFRSs. The most notable example was Japan, which in 2009 adopted a roadmap towards a decision on adoption of IFRSs, but where the lack of progress in the United States, coupled with increasing domestic scepticism about the desirability of moving to IFRSs, ushered in a period of indecision. China maintained its policy of substantial convergence, while India explored ways of adopting a modified version of IFRSs. Meanwhile, Brazil and many other Latin American countries announced or completed adoption of IFRSs.

This chapter reviews major developments between June 2011 and the middle of 2014. Because of the SEC’s silence on the use of IFRSs in the United States, the IASB had to find its position in a world where it had unquestionably become a leading player, but where national standard setters retained important positions in several jurisdictions. In modifying its consultative arrangements, the IASB paid particular attention to interaction with national standard setters. The IASB’s special relationship with the FASB was reconsidered. Some of the two boards’ remaining convergence projects were completed, but no new joint projects were initiated. The IASB undertook a major agenda consultation to chart its course over the next years. As evidenced by events in the United States and Europe, critical questioning of the IASB and of IFRSs continued.

`This chapter uses an original dataset comprising information on 123 transnational eco-labeling organizations to probe a series of hypotheses on the conditions for procedurally credible eco-labeling. The hypotheses are divided into three categories that focus on who is governing, where the governance takes place, and what sector or issue area the governance targets. The dataset includes information on best practice adherence across the full population of transnational eco-labeling organizations in 2013. The ensuing statistical analysis casts doubt on neo-Gramscian and rationalist arguments that ownership or sectoral competition are the primary determinants of procedural credibility in eco-labeling. Instead, the regression analyses show eco-labels that are industry sponsored or operating in highly competitive sectors are just as likely to craft credible eco-labels as their independently owned or less competitive counterparts. The statistical results also present a new puzzle, namely, that an eco-label’s presence in multiple markets is strongly and positively correlated with credibility.

This chapter considers the influence of European Union law in the post-crisis regulation of financial institutions on a global basis. The financial crisis of 2007–2009 created incentives for jurisdictions to ‘export’ their legislative solutions globally, in order to promote domestic stability. The resulting frictions were reduced by (a) promoting international agreement on optimal regulatory strategies and (b) using some form of mutual recognition strategy at the level of individual jurisdictions. The chapter argues that the European Union had relatively little influence on (a) because the international standard-setters are still dominated by the individual Member States. On the other hand, with the adoption of a Union level common rule book, implementation of (b) was placed in the hands of Union institutions. A case study of EU/US recognition of each other’s rules on central counterparties for derivatives clearing shows how cumbersome and political recognition may be.