期刊文献+

信贷领域金融消费者权益保护策略的博弈分析 被引量:2

Game Theory of Strategies for Protecting Financial Consumers’Rights and Interests in Credit Field
下载PDF
导出
摘要 由于金融机构存在利用经济实力及信息优势侵害金融消费者权益的行为,从而导致金融资源配置难以自发地形成帕累托最优,并破坏了金融生态环境。通过完善金融消费者权益保护机制,可以培育诚信的市场环境,促进信贷市场稳健发展。通过博弈演算,分析了金融机构、金融消费者和监管部门在信贷领域的博弈机理及相互之间的激励约束机制,据此探讨了适应个人理性要求的金融消费者权益保护策略。 Financial institutions abuse their advantages of economic and information to infringing the rights and interests of financial consumers,which not only causes the allocation of financial resource failed to reach Pareto Optimality spontaneously,but also destroys the financial ecological environment.By improving the mechanism of protecting financial consumers’rights and interests,we can cultivate an honest environment of market and steadily promote the development of credit market.By using the game theory,the paper analyzes the game mechanisms,the incentive and constraint mechanisms among financial institutions,financial consumers and the supervision departments in the credit field,and discusses the protection strategies of financial consumers’rights and interests which adapt to individual rationality.
作者 陈潇湘 郑海荣 Chen Xiaoxiang;Zheng Hairong
出处 《金融理论与实践》 北大核心 2021年第10期64-73,共10页 Financial Theory and Practice
基金 国家社科基金项目“‘新基建’背景下中国农村普惠金融发展对策研究”(编号:20BJY153)的资助。
关键词 银行信贷 博弈论 信息不对称 金融消费者权益 bank credit game theory asymmetric information financial consumers’rights and interests
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

二级参考文献92

  • 1廖岷.对危机后银行业“行为监管”的再认识[J].金融监管研究,2012(1):64-74. 被引量:21
  • 2段钢.国有商业银行绩效考评中的问题及对策[J].中国人才,2007(3):70-71. 被引量:6
  • 3Product Intervention, Financial Services Authority, January 2011, [ EB/OL] http: //www. fsa. gov. uk/pubs/discussiort/dp11_ 01. pdf.
  • 4中国香港特别行政区立法会资料摘要,选定地方对销售零售结构性金融产品的规管,[EB/OL]http://www.1egco.gov.hk/yx08—09/chinese/see/library/0809in06-c.pdf.
  • 5UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION AGENCY ACT OF 2009 (2009) , [ EB/OL] http: //www. financialstability, gov/docs/CFPA-Act, pdf.
  • 6CFPA Act, supra note2, at 1032.
  • 7欧盟将设新机构加强金融监管[N].联合早报,2010-09-04.
  • 8See Joshua D. Wright, Behavioral Law and Economics, Paternalism, and Consumer Contracts: An Empirical Perspective, 2 NYU J. L. &LIBERTY 470 (2007).
  • 9CFPAAct, supranote2, at §§ 1041 (a) (1) - (a) (2).
  • 10Joshua D. Wright & Todd J. Zywicki, Three Problematic Truths About the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act of 2009, [ EB/OL] ht-tp: //papers. ssm. com/sol3/papers, cfm? abstract_ id = 1474006~.

共引文献94

同被引文献22

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部