Over the last fifteen years, the European Union has built up its regulatory response to the rule of law crisis. That framework seeks to address rule of law-related undesirable events depending on whether or not they have already occurred. As risk prevention has a limited role in the EU’s rule of law policy, undesirable events are mostly dealt with in the context of crisis management. Evaluation, reaction and conditionality mechanisms are all affected by issues relating to operability and legitimacy which reduce their overall performance. The resulting moderate efficiency of crisis management tools may still be improved by making use of the upgraded rule of law mechanisms in a systemic way.

This article provides critical and analytical views on legal regulation to achieve a balance between FinTech innovation, risk prevention, and financial stability, by focusing on the trend of FinTech firms entering the financial-services industry and the associated regulatory and legal challenges that are already arising in China. It adopts a balanced approach as a theoretical-analysis perspective, weighing various considerations, and proposes the policy option of FinTech regulation under the principle of interest balance. The analysis aims to contribute new insights to an ongoing debate in China on the relationship between legal and regulatory reform, FinTech innovation, and risk prevention. This article argues that legal challenges, rather than technical problems, remain the key obstacles to effective FinTech regulation. Our proposed hypothesis seeks to explain how a legal regulation achieves balancing the competing interests between FinTech innovation, risk prevention, and financial stability in the booming of China’s FinTech. Finally, this article proposes the implementation of goal-oriented responsive regulation by improving the legal framework of FinTech regulatory regimes through policy option.

Introduction / Innovation Concept: With aging, increasing complexity, and prolonged emergency department (ED) stays, patient falls are an increasing problem. Accreditation Canada recently listed falls risk management (FRM) as a required operational practice (ROP). The University of Alberta ED had no screening tool or education program specific to falls. Gaps in identifying patients with altered consciousness, intoxication, or are undergoing procedural sedation were noted in the Alberta Health Services (AHS) recommended tool. This gap led to the development piloting of an ED specific FRM screening tool. Methods: A literature review was completed to assess current fall assessment tools and their applicability to the ED. No ED specific tools were identified leading to the development of the FRM tool. Prior to the FRM tool being piloted, nursing staff were asked to respond to a voluntary survey on their perceived knowledge of falls management followed by a survey testing their actual knowledge. They were then educated on the FRM and protocol through in-services, power point presentations, and fact sheets. A post education knowledge survey was then sent out. Multidisciplinary working groups provided feedback throughout the pilot, resulting in modifications prior to final implementation. Curriculum, Tool, or Material: The FRM tool consists of 10 variables with a maximum score of 20. Variables included are: falls in the last 12 months? Mechanical (1), Physiological (2), Multiple (3); age ≥70 or frail (2); mobility assist device (1) confusion or disorientation (5); impaired gait (1); incontinence (1); intoxicated (3); procedural sedation (3); and unconscious (5). All except for the last 3 variables were adapted from inpatient risk tools. Patients were categorized as low (1-2 points), moderate (3-4 points), or high risk (5+ points) and those scoring ≥3 had a safety protocol implemented. The survey regarding perceived knowledge for management of falls led to an average score of 86.6% (n=46). When tested on their actual knowledge they scored 48.8% (n=29). Following training on the FRM tool and protocol, the actual knowledge of 18 respondents averaged 83%. Conclusion: The FRM screening tool has been implemented and a comparative study looking at ED risk predictability matched to existing falls risk scores. Based on research findings the FRM will be considered for a provincial implementation.