What is it about?

New research constructively critiques the global method for evaluating the effectiveness of anti-money laundering regimes. There is a dearth of scholarship whether the new global AML/CFT ‘effectiveness’ framework is sufficiently robust to assess effectiveness as it purports. This article begins addressing that gap. It combines outcomes/effectiveness and AML disciplines and uses recent mutual evaluations to assess the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF's) anti-money laundering ‘effectiveness’ methodology.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

If the “outcomes” of the “effectiveness” framework do not match the crime and terrorism prevention policy goals of nation states, the new “main” component for assessing the effectiveness of anti-money laundering regimes potentially detracts focus and resources from, rather than towards, intended policy objectives.


FATF’s ‘effectiveness’ methodology does not yet reflect an outcome-oriented framework as it purports. Misapplication of outcome labels to outputs and activities miss an opportunity to evaluate outcomes, as the impact and effect of anti-money laundering policies.

Dr Ronald F Pol
La Trobe University

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Anti-money laundering effectiveness: assessing outcomes or ticking boxes?, Journal of Money Laundering Control, May 2018, Emerald, DOI: 10.1108/jmlc-07-2017-0029.
You can read the full text:




The following have contributed to this page