Affiliation:
1. University of Birmingham Department of Political Science and International Studies Birmingham UK
Abstract
AbstractThe effectiveness of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) international regime to govern anti-money laundering (AML) and counterterrorist financing (CTF) has been questioned since its establishment. In theory, theFATF’s network of multilevel actors should protect the integrity of the international financial system. The empirical evidence in this article shows that theFATFhas made a difference in ensuring states’ (official) compliance with its measures, using extrinsic motivation tools; for example, ranking noncompliant states. However, it argues that such motivation only ensures actors’ minimum compliance, meaning that the regime’s effectiveness is suboptimal, while fostering intrinsic motivation would improve actors’ performance. Therefore, it is essential to understand why actors comply with theFATFapproach and how they could be persuaded to achieve better compliance so that the regime’s effectiveness is feasible. This article explores these questions, using interviews with thirty practitioners in three locations, supported by a qualitative analysis of documentary data.
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Safety Research,General Environmental Science,Sociology and Political Science
Reference87 articles.
1. Abbott, Kenneth W., and Duncan Snidal. “Taking Responsive Regulation Transnational: Strategies for International Organizations.” Regulation and Governance 7 (2013), 95–113. Doi 10.1111/j.1748–5991.2012.01167.x.
2. Acharya, Arabinda. Targeting Terrorist Financing (London: Routledge, 2009).
3. Akerlof, George A., and William T. Dickens. “The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance.” American Economic Review 72 (3) (1982), 307–319.
4. Alexandroff, Alan S., ed. Can the World Be Governed? Possibilities for Effective Multilateralism (Wilfrid Canada: Laurier University Press, 2008).
5. Aufhauser, David D. “Terrorist Financing: Foxes Run to Ground.” Journal of Money Laundering Control 6 (4) (2003), 301–305. DOI 10.1108/13685200310809617.