Paternalistic forms of regulation for the retail investment market have been gradual and restrained, even though significant gaps exist between investors’ needs and market-based provision. As ordinary citizens reckon with a variety of savings needs and become financial citizens responsible for their own financial welfare provision, financial health is not merely an issue of individual fortunes but a social need. Adverse financial welfare consequences can at scale become a social issue, as is reflected in the social demands and critique entailing from the collapse of London and Capital Finance in the UK. The need for more regulatory paternalism goes beyond preventing mis-selling, and the outworking of welfare beyond point-of-sale remains relatively unconsidered. Post-sale welfare is, however, increasingly recognised for consumer credit and is slower to catch on in relation to savings needs and investments. This paper advocates that the regulator should not remain ambivalent about the need for more paternalistic interventions. Paternalistic protection is not only about shifting more burdens to the industry but also about the provision of public goods where there are standardised baseline needs for retail investors. This paper unpacks the roles of both the public and private sectors in addressing retail investors’ financial welfare needs.

中文翻译：

---

在消费金融投资监管方面更加家长式作风？私营部门职责和公共产品分析

尽管投资者的需求与基于市场的供给之间存在很大差距，但对零售投资市场的家长式监管形式一直是渐进式和克制的。当普通公民考虑到各种储蓄需求并成为负责自己财务福利的金融公民时，财务健康不仅是个人财富的问题，也是社会需求的问题。不利的金融福利后果可以大规模地成为一个社会问题，正如伦敦和资本金融在英国的崩溃所带来的社会需求和批评所反映的那样。对更多监管家长作风的需要超出了防止不当销售的范围，销售点之外的福利外包仍然相对未被考虑。然而，售后福利是 消费信贷越来越受到认可，但在储蓄需求和投资方面的普及速度较慢。本文主张，监管机构不应对是否需要更多的家长式干预持矛盾态度。家长式保护不仅是为了将更多的负担转移给行业，而且是为了在散户投资者有标准化基线需求的情况下提供公共产品。本文揭示了公共和私营部门在满足散户投资者的金融福利需求方面的作用。家长式保护不仅是为了将更多的负担转移给行业，而且是为了在散户投资者有标准化基线需求的情况下提供公共产品。本文揭示了公共和私营部门在满足散户投资者的金融福利需求方面的作用。家长式保护不仅是为了将更多的负担转移给行业，而且是为了在散户投资者有标准化基线需求的情况下提供公共产品。本文揭示了公共和私营部门在满足散户投资者的金融福利需求方面的作用。