当前位置: X-MOL 学术Theory and Society › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Where are the market devices? Exploring the links among regulation, markets, and technology at the securities and exchange commission, 1935–2010
Theory and Society ( IF 3.226 ) Pub Date : 2020-03-01 , DOI: 10.1007/s11186-020-09383-4
Juan Pablo Pardo-Guerra

This article examines regulation’s understanding of technology in American financial markets as means for rethinking the contours and institutional limits of governance in the age of financialization. The article identifies how the Securities and Exchange Commission perceived markets and their conceptual relation to technology throughout much of the long twentieth century by distilling the “ontologies” expressed by the agency’s leadership. Despite the fact that SEC’s commissioners recognized technologies as playing a central role in the market’s current and future operations, these were never effectively brought under regulatory scrutiny even when such action fell under the commission's jurisdictional remit. Rather than regulating technologies as constitutive of markets, the governance of the material devices of finance was discursively kept at arm's-length by presenting them as intractable objects that were external to financial innovation. Triangulating across several techniques of computational text analysis, this article shows how this interpretation of technology mirrored distinct shifts in how regulators understood markets, from being physical trading sites populated by agents that required vetting and certification to a distributed, multi-sited system surveilled through transparency and disclosure. Throughout these ontological transitions, technology’s inscrutability remained, limiting the capacity of the state and its regulatory agencies to shape the evolution of finance and its underlying infrastructures.

中文翻译:

市场设备在哪里?在证券交易委员会探索监管、市场和技术之间的联系,1935-2010

本文考察了监管对美国金融市场技术的理解,以此重新思考金融化时代治理的轮廓和制度限制。本文通过提炼该机构领导层表达的“本体论”,确定了证券交易委员会在整个 20 世纪的大部分时间里如何看待市场及其与技术的概念关系。尽管 SEC 的委员们承认技术在市场当前和未来的运作中发挥着核心作用,但即使此类行动属于委员会的管辖范围,这些行为也从未有效地受到监管审查。与其将技术作为市场的组成部分进行监管,金融物质设备的治理在话语上保持一定距离,将它们呈现为金融创新之外的棘手对象。本文对计算文本分析的几种技术进行了三角测量,展示了这种对技术的解释如何反映监管机构对市场理解方式的明显转变,从需要审查和认证的代理填充的实物交易站点到通过透明度进行监控的分布式多站点系统和披露。在这些本体论转变过程中,技术的神秘性仍然存在,这限制了国家及其监管机构塑造金融及其底层基础设施演变的能力。s-length 通过将它们呈现为金融创新外部的棘手对象。本文对计算文本分析的几种技术进行了三角测量,展示了这种对技术的解释如何反映监管机构对市场理解方式的明显转变,从需要审查和认证的代理填充的实物交易站点到通过透明度进行监控的分布式多站点系统和披露。在这些本体论转变过程中,技术的神秘性仍然存在,这限制了国家及其监管机构塑造金融及其底层基础设施演变的能力。s-length 通过将它们呈现为金融创新外部的棘手对象。本文对计算文本分析的几种技术进行了三角测量,展示了这种对技术的解释如何反映监管机构对市场理解方式的明显转变,从需要审查和认证的代理填充的实物交易站点到通过透明度进行监控的分布式多站点系统和披露。在这些本体论转变过程中,技术的神秘性仍然存在,这限制了国家及其监管机构塑造金融及其底层基础设施演变的能力。本文展示了这种对技术的解释如何反映监管机构对市场理解方式的明显转变,从需要审查和认证的代理填充的实体交易站点到通过透明度和披露进行监控的分布式多站点系统。在这些本体论转变过程中,技术的神秘性仍然存在,这限制了国家及其监管机构塑造金融及其底层基础设施演变的能力。本文展示了这种对技术的解释如何反映监管机构对市场理解方式的明显转变,从需要审查和认证的代理填充的实体交易站点到通过透明度和披露进行监控的分布式多站点系统。在这些本体论转变过程中,技术的神秘性仍然存在,这限制了国家及其监管机构塑造金融及其底层基础设施演变的能力。
更新日期:2020-03-01
down
wechat
bug