We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Forecasting how the emerging regime of global financial regulation will respond to the next financial crisis involves a sense of its limits, and underscores the way that law-like constraints mesh with the need for administrative discretion. Traditionally, crisis response is the sort of government work that is most amenable to discretion. Because crises are difficult to predict, flexibility may be necessary to effectively respond. The values of effective crisis response – promptness, overwhelming force, perhaps a degree of surprise–are not amenable to ordinary values of bureaucratic order. This, however, does not mean that crisis response is a law-free zone. There are few crises that have not been dealt with by a response inflected by the legal and process constraints of ordinary administration, even if the requirements of crisis interdiction have forced regulators more concerned with effectiveness than with process to act with flexibility and evasion.
This, however, does not mean that crisis response is a law-free zone. There are few crises that have not been dealt with by a response inflected by the legal and process constraints of ordinary administration, even if the requirements of crisis interdiction have forced regulators more concerned with effectiveness than with process to act with flexibility and evasion.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.