Simply to call on enhanced regulation is a little short

The financial and economic crisis we are living is also a crisis of the rule: the regulation has malfunctioned, and he must learn the lessons. Simply to call on enhanced regulation is a little short. Must be that it is necessary, while except to return to an administered economy, it must remain the exception. If it is required, it cannot be the same. States, public authorities such as companies and private actors must learn to use different rules differently.

There is in effect, to regulate behaviour in society, two kinds of rules: those, public, enacted by the legislature, Government and administrative authorities, but also those, private, that bind professions and businesses. It is often forgotten in our country the role of this private, yet ancient and important regulation, since the rules prevailing in the sport until the professional ethics of the professions or advertising. Self-regulation, as it is called often, is not, in this case, a lack of rules, still less a laissez-faire: it is a professional regulation must enable a sector to behave as wished by the company.

However, in the financial and banking sector, the dysfunctions observed are as well the public regulation of private regulation. Public regulation authorities, focusing on the control of the own funds of banks, not, for example, have monitored their methods of internal control or the solvency of their clients, while leaving out supervision of specialized institutions, for example in the mortgage, and "hedge funds". Privacy regulation also had its shortcomings: the crisis has revealed inadequate, as enacted by the International Accounting Standards Board accounting standards, or rules, for including the behaviour of the rating agencies.

The first lesson we must learn from the crisis, is the need for public and private regulators to talk and to coordinate. To be unaware, is left without monitoring the whole activities. Public rules and private rules must connect and complement. Governance in a global world and a free market, demand public rules, public authorities must set the rules of the game, but also private rules, because it is the only way of empowering stakeholders to take account of the realities on the ground, much more complex and international, which deploys the regulation. Co-regulation is also a method to encourage, when public authorities are themselves methods and control of private regulation.

The other lesson is the increasing inadequacy of our national laws: they become less and less effective, or inoperative, in a world without borders. How to regulate Internet in his country How prohibit the exchange of files, if it is indeed legal Governance becomes global, and national law, when it deals with off border trade, must take into account the rule of the game installed on the international level. Matters are complicated further with the EU, which imposes a legal level for the Member States such as the France.

It cannot therefore, after this crisis, self-regulation outside the law to declare and to simply return to a public and traditional regulation in his country. Governments have to deal with an infinitely more complex world, where they no longer have the facility to appeal only to their laws and their authorities to resolve the problems. In the 21st century, governance is more vertical the administered State: it becomes horizontal between public and private, from one country to another, who talk and work together. Regulation becomes double entry, public and private on the one hand, national and international one.

That private actors did conclude not that self-regulation has won: the latter must profoundly change if she is to meet what is expected of a credible and effective private rules, device worthy to participate in the regulation of a sector set. As a mode of production of standards, it must be democratized by consulting third parties concerned, with transparent, impartial and public breaches control. As such, the self-regulation of the Internet, to cite it, is open to criticism: primarily producing technical standards, it too opaque and closed remains in the hands of a few organizations without sufficient legitimacy. It must also respect the rules of competition, as requested by Brussels to professional levels of the Union. Moving from traditional self-regulation, of type "small arrangements between friends", a true regulation professional, credible and accepted by society, causes strong pressures for professionals and businesses.

Our country, like any other, but with the handicap of his statist tradition, was a great effort to enter into this new paradigm. The State, from be weakened, but can tap into this new governance of the new powers, using weapons of private regulation and co-regulation. Will it deploy, in addition, a higher authority control and monitoring of man, rather than the execution and management of things, more costly and bureaucratic. Professionals and companies, they will find the way to legitimize their claim for a greater social responsibility and to justify the freedoms that should be a market more effectively regulated that it will be in concert.