Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
2.0
1.3
Journals
Laws
Special Issues
Securitization and Financial Innovation in a Post Crisis World
share announcement

Securitization and Financial Innovation in a Post Crisis World

A special issue of Laws (ISSN 2075-471X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (1 March 2021) | Viewed by 11221

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Andrea Miglionico

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Law, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Interests: banking and finance law; regulation of financial markets; law and economics

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The recent increase of new technologies in the securities market has constituted an important innovation in terms of regulatory approaches and financial stability. Financial technologies (FinTech) generally refer to technical innovation being applied in a traditional financial services system that competes with traditional banking offers. The role FinTech plays in the financial industry poses new challenges for regulatory authorities, particularly in balancing technological developments and traditional regulated financial services. In economic terms, FinTech could improve risk assessment, credit allocation, capital efficiency and better understanding of the financial stability risks. Financial innovations can bring benefits but also exacerbate risks for financial stability and consumer protection, particularly in the securitization process. It is worth noting that “securitization involves transactions that enable a lender or a creditor—typically a credit institution or a corporation—to refinance a set of loans, exposures or receivables, such as residential loans, auto loans or leases, consumer loans, credit cards or trade receivables, by transforming them into tradable securities” (Regulation (EU) 2017/2402).

This Special Issue provides an appraisal of the impact of FinTech in the securitization process taking into account the regulatory developments of securities and secured transactions. The impact of these technological developments on financial services is a new area of research. We welcome contributions in the following areas:

(1) the relationship between the new financial technologies and securitization;

(2) the implications of FinTech for financial services;

(3) the regulatory developments of securitization and financial technology;

(4) consumer and investor protection in the aftermath of new financial technologies.

Review and reform of these wide areas of law can represent a significant undertaking, in particular for financial technologies.

Dr. Andrea Miglionico
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Laws is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

References

  • EBA Discussion Paper On the Significant Risk Transfer in Securitisation, EBA-DP-2017-03, 19 September 2017.
  • Steven L. Schwarcz, ‘Securitization, Structured Finance, and Covered Bonds’ (2013) 39 Journal of Corporation Law.
  • Steven L. Schwarcz, ‘The Alchemy of Asset Securitization’ (1994) 1 Stanford Journal of Law and Business.
  • Rita Taureck, ‘Securitization theory and securitization studies’ (2006) 9(1) Journal of International Relations and Development.
  • Hyman P. Minsky and L. Randall Wray, ‘Securitization’ (2008) Economics Policy Note Archive 08-2, Levy Economics Institute.
  • Gary B. Gorton and Nicholas S. Souleles, ‘Special Purpose Vehicles and Securitization’ in Mark Carey and René M. Stulz (eds), The Risks of Financial Institutions (University of Chicago Press 2007).
  • Gerard Caprio Jr., Aslı Demirgüç-Kunt and Edward J. Kane, ‘The 2007 Meltdown in Structured Securitization: Searching for Lessons, not Scapegoats’ (2010) 25 The World Bank Research Observer.
  • Kenneth C. Kettering, ‘Securitization and Its Discontents: The Dynamics of Financial Product Development’ (2008) 29 Cardozo Law Review.
  • European Securities and Markets Authority, ‘The Distributed Ledger Technology Applied to Securities Markets’, Discussion Paper ESMA/2016/773, 2 June 2016.
  • European Securities and Markets Authority, ‘Financial Innovation Day’, ESMA/2015/1914, 16 December 2015.
  • Adrian Blundell-Wignall, ‘Innovation in a Capital Market Union: harnessing innovation to improve access to finance and spur investment’, Keynote at the ESMA Financial Innovation Day 2015.
  • European Securities and Markets Authority, ‘Investment-based crowdfunding’, Opinion ESMA/2014/1378, 18 December 2014.
  • Douglas W. Arner, Jànos Barberis and Ross P. Buckley, ‘The Evolution of FinTech: A New Post-Crisis Paradigm?’, University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2015/047.
  • Bruno Campenon, ‘Fintech and the future of securities services’ (2016) 8(2) Journal of Securities Operations & Custody.
  • Lee A. Schneider, Max Shaul and Clare K. Lascelles, ‘Regulatory Priorities for FinTech Firms—and Investors—in the Coming Year’ (2016) 29(4) Journal of Taxation and Regulation of Financial Institutions.
  • European Commission, FinTech Action Plan, 2018, available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/180308-action-plan-fintech_en.

Keywords

  • securitization
  • structured finance
  • securities regulation
  • financial technology
  • disintermediation

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

11 pages, 453 KiB  
Article
Impact of MiFID II on the Market Volatility—Analysis on Some Developed and Emerging European Stock Markets
by Marius Cristian Miloș
Laws 2021, 10(3), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws10030055 - 30 Jun 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 5339
Abstract
The paper investigates whether the implementation of MiFID II, a packet of financial legislation applying broadly to European Union financial markets, has led to a change in the volatility of some European developed and emerging stock markets. We show that for the developed [...] Read more.
The paper investigates whether the implementation of MiFID II, a packet of financial legislation applying broadly to European Union financial markets, has led to a change in the volatility of some European developed and emerging stock markets. We show that for the developed capital markets considered in the analysis, MiFID II did not lead to a decrease in the volatility of capital markets. On the contrary, for all analysis intervals considered (3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months and 24 months), the impact on volatility is positive, with volatility increasing in the case of the FTSE 100, CAC40 and DAX stock indexes. There is a similar significant relationship for the Czech stock market, but only over the three-month interval. For the Polish and Romanian stock markets, which enforced MiFID II later, a negative impact of MiFID II on volatility could also be observed. In the Romanian market, MiFID II had a negative impact on volatility on the short-term horizon, while for the Polish market, the impact of MiFID II on volatility is noticeable on a longer term of 24 months. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Securitization and Financial Innovation in a Post Crisis World)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

26 pages, 646 KiB  
Article
A Study of the Implications of the European Securitisation Regulation 2017/2402 on Malta
by Joseph Micallef, Simon Grima, Sharon Seychell, Ramona Rupeika-Apoga and Mark Lawrence Zammit
Laws 2020, 9(3), 20; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws9030020 - 19 Sep 2020
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 4708
Abstract
A decade ago, the financial world was taken by surprise, when prominent credit institutions filed for bankruptcy. The financial crisis phenomena spurred the need for regulating Securitisation and enhancing the capital requirements framework. In response, the Basel Committee initiated the regulatory treatment for [...] Read more.
A decade ago, the financial world was taken by surprise, when prominent credit institutions filed for bankruptcy. The financial crisis phenomena spurred the need for regulating Securitisation and enhancing the capital requirements framework. In response, the Basel Committee initiated the regulatory treatment for the Simple Transparent and Comparable Securitisation (STC Securitisation), the USA passed the Dodd–Frank Act and the EU introduced Securitisation Regulation No. 2017/2402 to address the causes and failures, which were identified, following the aftermath of this financial crisis. With this article, we aim to analyse the main provisions of the Regulation No. 2017/2402 on Malta as a jurisdiction for securitisation and provide an insight on the prospective market development. To reach our aim we analysed scholarly documentation (academic chapters, journals, articles and monographs), rules, guidelines, recommendations, directives and regulations and use the case study methodology, as suggested by Yin (2003) and Yazan (2015), on Malta. In our opinion, recently, Malta has made significant improvements in the securitisation sector, mostly evidenced by the introduction of the legislation. All interviewees emphasised that Malta has substantial opportunities for further growth in the securitisation market and it is encouraged to be exploited well. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Securitization and Financial Innovation in a Post Crisis World)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop