Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGallagher, Kevin P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFfrench-Davis, Ricardoen_US
dc.contributor.authorLim, Mah-Huien_US
dc.contributor.authorSoverel, Katherineen_US
dc.contributor.otherBoston University Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studiesen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-24T21:24:32Z
dc.date.available2017-08-24T21:24:32Z
dc.date.issued2013-10
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2144/23659
dc.descriptionThis repository item contains a working paper from the Boston University Global Economic Governance Initiative. The Global Economic Governance Initiative (GEGI) is a research program of the Center for Finance, Law & Policy, the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, and the Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies. It was founded in 2008 to advance policy-relevant knowledge about governance for financial stability, human development, and the environment.en_US
dc.description.abstractThere is growing recognition that nations may need to deploy cross-border financial regulations to prevent and mitigate financial crises. Indeed, in December of 2012 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) agreed on a new ‘institutional view’ that notes how the IMF will begin to recommend that nations deploy cross-border financial regulations going forward. However, many nations have become party to global, regional, and bi-lateral trade and investment treaties that may restrict their ability to effectively deploy such regulations. This paper examines the cases of two countries currently in negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP): Chile and Malaysia. The paper examines the extent to which each nation has deployed cross-border financial regulations in the past, and the extent to which they have negotiated the policy space for such regulations in its previous trade and investment treaties. Finally, it analyzes the extent to which such measures would be permitted if the TPP’s investment provisions looked like the model bi-lateral investment treaty of the United States. We find that, with some important exceptions, both countries have successfully deployed crossborder financial regulations and have carved out the ability to do so under a sample of representative trading commitments. However, such policy space would be jeopardized if the TPP conformed to the US model rather than arrangements that each country has been able to broker in other arenas.en_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherBoston University Global Economic Governance Initiativeen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGEGI Working Paper; Paper 2, October 2013
dc.rightsCopyright 2013 Boston University. Permission to copy without fee all or part of this material is granted provided that: 1. The copies are not made or distributed for direct commercial advantage; 2. the report title, author, document number, and release date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of BOSTON UNIVERSITY TRUSTEES. To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires a fee and / or special permission.en_US
dc.subjectInternational Monetary Fund (IMF)en_US
dc.subjectTrans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)en_US
dc.subjectChileen_US
dc.subjectMalaysiaen_US
dc.titleFinancial stability and the Trans-Pacific Partnership: lessons from Chile and Malaysiaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.holderBoston Universityen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record