The Institutional Logic and Regulatory Architecture of Financial Data Regulatory Sandboxes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/jc24mh98Keywords:
Financial Data, Regulatory Sandbox, Digital Finance, Data Governance, AI RegulationAbstract
The core challenge in financial data governance has shifted from mere rights protection to the construction of trustworthy circulation of data. Traditional regulation, which relies on ex-ante rules and ex-post accountability, struggles to adapt to the compound risks generated by continuous data flows and iterative model development. It often finds itself trapped between regulatory lag and stifled innovation. The institutional significance of the financial data regulatory sandbox lies in embedding data processing and algorithmic operations within an observable and verifiable regulatory process, transforming uncertain risks into empirical knowledge necessary for rule recalibration. Although extraterritorial practices vary across jurisdictions, they collectively point toward a transformation of regulatory capacity—from case-by-case approvals to infrastructure development. Whether through data infrastructure supporting regulatory learning, model validation tools embedded in regulatory workflows, or real-world scenarios testing data authorization and consumer protection, the essence is to ground regulatory judgment in empirical evidence through controlled testing. China's construction of a financial data regulatory sandbox should transcend the mindset of temporary exemptions and project-based pilots, moving toward an institutionalized regulatory mechanism anchored in lawful data entry, model impact assessments, process auditing, consumer remedies, and rule feedback.
Downloads
References
[1] Huang, Y., & Huang, Z. (2018). Digital finance in China: present and future. China Economic Quarterly, 17(4), 1492. [In Chinese]
[2] Xu, D. (2018). The disruptive innovation nature of FinTech and new approach to RegTech. Oriental Law, (2), 7. [In Chinese]
[3] Liao, F. (2019). Analysis of the theory and practice of regulatory sandbox in the context of FinTech. Journal of Xiamen University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), (2), 14. [In Chinese]
[4] Li, W., & Jiang, Z. (2017). FinTech development and regulation: a regulator's perspective. Financial Regulation Research, (3), 7. [In Chinese]
[5] Li, S., & Li, M. (2021). Reflection and prospect of FinTech regulation: taking sandbox regulation as an example. Gansu Social Sciences, (3), 112. [In Chinese]
[6] Li, W., & Jiang, Z. (2017). FinTech development and regulation: a regulator's perspective. Financial Regulation Research, (3), 10. [In Chinese]
[7] Cornelli, G., Doerr, S., Gambacorta, L., & Merrouche, O. (2024). Regulatory sandboxes and fintech funding: evidence from the UK. Review of Finance, 28(1), 203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfad017
[8] Tan, Y. (2024). FinTech innovation and regulation: taking Hong Kong regulatory sandbox as an example. FinTech Era, 32(4), 46. [In Chinese]
[9] Wang, D., & Zhai, R. (2021). International experience and policy implications of FinTech regulatory sandbox. Contemporary Financial Research, (Z4), 101. [In Chinese]
[10] Dardykina, A. (2025). Is there enough sand in the sandbox? European Business Law Review, 36(7), 1083. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EULR2025062
[11] Lehmann, M. (2023). Regulating innovation through digital platforms: the sandbox tool. European Company and Financial Law Review, 19(5), 828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2022-0029
[12] Zhang, Y., Qu, J., & Zhang, X. (2025). AI regulatory sandbox: concept definition, practical experience and implications for China. World Sci Tech R&D, 47(S1), 54. [In Chinese]
[13] Ye, X. (2024). Regarding the Regulatory Sandbox Route and Mechanism for Governance of Artificial Intelligence. Science Technology and Law (Chinese English Version), (5), 136. [In Chinese]
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Academic Journal of Finance and Accounting

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.







