Home⇛JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research Journal⇛vol. 65 no. 3 (2026)

Optimizing Business Rule Engines Reduces Trade Finance Compliance Errors: A Practice-Based Framework

Alvin C. Mancenido | Leanne Aireca P. Tumaroy | Michelle F. Go | Teodulfo P. Mahilum Jr | Rosemarie F. Magno

Discipline: business and management (non-specific)

 

Abstract:

Trade finance compliance has become increasingly complex as financial institutions navigate evolving anti-money laundering, know-your-customer, and environmental, social, and governance requirements across global markets. Business rule engines have emerged as essential automation tools, yet their optimization remains insufficiently explored in banking contexts. This narrative literature review synthesizes evidence from 53 sources across six continents to develop a practice-based framework strengthening rule engine design quality, governance features, stakeholder involvement, and policy integration. Evidence from regulatory studies, banking analyses, and international fintech research reveals four mechanisms enhancing compliance performance: high-quality rule design reduces processing errors by 30-45 percent through modular architecture and version control; governance features including audit trails and explainability improve transparency and regulatory defensibility; stakeholder involvement through participatory design increases system usability and adoption by 25-40 percent; and policy integration aligning rule logic with regulatory intent reduces compliance breaches by embedding statutory requirements directly into executable logic. The study concludes that business rule engine optimization requires systemic alignment of technical architecture, organizational governance, and regulatory frameworks rather than isolated technological enhancement. The proposed framework offers banks a validated model for achieving robust, auditable, and efficient compliance automation in trade finance operations.



References:

  1. Anti-Money Laundering Council (Philippines). (2023-2025). Advisories and guidance on strengthening AML/CFT/CPF measures and national commitments. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/5/96617
  2. ASEAN Capital Markets Forum. (2021). ASEAN Sustainable Finance Roadmap. https://www.dof.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/ALCEP-Roadmap.pdf
  3. ASEAN Secretariat. (2022). ASEAN Handbook on Good Regulatory Practice. https://asean.org/book/asean-handbook-on-good-regulatory-practice/
  4. Rajah & Tann Asia. (2024). Expanded ASEAN Guide on AI Governance and Ethics. https://www.rajahtannasia.com/viewpoints/expanded-asean-guide-on-ai-governance-and-ethics/
  5. Wyman, O. (2017). Accelerating financial inclusion in South-East Asia with digital finance. Asian Development Bank.
  6. Boaz, A., Hanney, S., Borst, R., O’Shea, A., & Kok, M. (2018). How to engage stakeholders in research: design principles to support improvement. Health research policy and systems, 16(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6
  7. Bureau of Customs (Philippines). (2019). Customs Administrative Order No. 01-2019: Post Clearance Audit and Prior Disclosure Program. https://customs.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/cao-01-2019_Post_Clearance_Audit_and_Prior_Disclosure_Program.pdf
  8. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design/book255675
  9. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. (2020). Memorandum No. M-2020-84. https://www.bsp.gov.ph/Regulations/Issuances/2020/m084.pdf
  10. Deloitte Southeast Asia. (n.d.). Deloitte Compliance Monitor: Technology components in compliance infrastructure. https://www2.deloitte.com/sea/en/pages/risk/solutions/compliance-monitor.html
  11. Department of Energy (Philippines). (2019). Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 11285. https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/issuances/irr_ra_11285.pdf
  12. Duffy, A., Boroumandzad, N., Sherman, A. L., Christie, G., Riadi, I., & Moreno, S. (2025). Examining challenges to co-design digital health interventions with end users: systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 27, e50178. doi:10.2196/50178
  13. EPS Capital Corp. (2022, January 31). Diagnostic Analyses Report of Energy Efficiency Development in Three Countries: Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam. https://tinyurl.com/2334b89n
  14. Intal Jr, P., & Gill, D. (2016). The Development of Regulatory Management Systems in East Asia: Deconstruction, Insights, and Fostering ASEAN’s Quiet Revolution. Books. https://ideas.repec.org/b/era/eriabk/2015-rpr-03.html
  15. Buban, S., Nagallo, J., & Reyes, C. V. (2023). Results from the Follow-up ASEAN Seamless Trade Facilitation Indicators (ASTFI II)–Philippines. Follow-up ASEAN Seamless Trade Facilitation Indicators, 159.
  16. Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health services research, 48(6pt2), 2134-2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
  17. Iqbal, A. (2025, November 11). Trade on intelligence: How AI is rewriting the rules of corporate banking in Southeast Asia. Finastra. https://www.finastra.com/viewpoints/articles/trade-intelligence-how-ai-rewriting-rules-corporate-banking-southeast-asia
  18. Financial Action Task Force (FATF). (2022, 2025). The Philippines’ progress in strengthening measures to tackle money laundering and terrorist financing. https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Mutualevaluations/Fur-philippines-2022.html
  19. Frias, K. P. P. (2015). Philippine Business and the Regulatory Environment. Philippine Management Review, 22. https://pmr.upd.edu.ph/index.php/pmr/article/view/282
  20. Goh, C., Pan, G., Seow, P. S., LEE, B. H. Z., & Yong, M. (2019). Charting the future of accountancy with AI. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2833&context=soa_researc
  21. Handoyo, S., & Anas, S. (2024). The effect of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) on firm performance: the moderating role of country regulatory quality and government effectiveness in ASEAN. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2371071. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2371071
  22. Mikulić, I., Lisjak, D., & Štefanić, N. (2021). A rule-based system for human performance evaluation: A case study. Applied Sciences, 11(7), 2904. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11072904
  23. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Language, 11(322p), 23cm.
  24. Lacity, M. C., & Willcocks, L. P. (2016). A new approach to automating services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(1), 41-49.
    https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/68135
  25. Llanto, G. M. (2016). Towards a Requisite Regulatory Management System: Philippines. https://www.eria.org/publications/towards-a-requisite-regulatory-management-system-philippines/
  26. Lee, J. J., & Ng, D. (2025). Service Design in the Context of Pragmatic Governance: Cases of the Singapore Government. Plurality and Cultural Specificity of Service Design in East and Southeast Asia, 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78884-0_4
  27. Lukkien, D. R., Askari, S. I., Stolwijk, N. E., Hofstede, B. M., Nap, H. H., Boon, W. P., ... & Minkman, M. M. (2024). Making co-design more responsible: case study on the development of an AI-based decision support system in dementia care. JMIR Human Factors, 11(1), e55961. doi:10.2196/55961
  28. Nelson, R. R., Todd, P. A., & Wixom, B. H. (2005). Antecedents of information and system quality: an empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. Journal of management information systems, 21(4), 199-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2005.11045823
  29. Nueva Solutions. (2025, July 21). Why GRC automation is critical for APAC enterprises---and how CyberHQ is transforming cyber governance. https://nuevasolutions.com/grc-automation-apac-benefits-avertro-cyberhq-cyber-governance/
  30. OECD. (2024). Stakeholder engagement for sustainable infrastructure in Southeast Asia. https://www.oecd.org/southeast-asia/stakeholder-engagement-sustainable-infrastructure/
  31. OECD. (2024). Supporting regulatory reforms in Southeast Asia. https://www.oecd.org/southeast-asia/regulatory-reform/
  32. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-research-evaluation-methods/book232962
  33. Philippine Trade Facilitation Committee. (2022-2028). Philippine Trade Facilitation Roadmap. Bureau of Customs. https://www.dof.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/PTFC-ROADMAP-SEP20-1.pdf
  34. Maheshwari, A. (2025, October 14). From Automation to Intelligence: How AI is Reshaping Trade Compliance. PortCalls Asia. https://www.portcalls.com/ai-reshaping-trade-compliance-2025/
  35. PwC. (2022). Risk and Regulatory Outlook 2022: Banking Outlook in Southeast Asia. https://www.pwc.com/my/en/assets/publications/2022/pwc-risk-regulatory-outlook-2022-rising-tides1.pdf
  36. PwC. (2024). Sustainability counts 2024. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/asia-pacific/esg/sustainability-counts/sustainability-counts-2024.pdf
  37. Qu, K., Gong, T., & Shao, J. (2020). Design and implementation of system generator based on rule engine. Procedia Computer Science, 166, 517-522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.02.054
  38. Quimba, F. M. A., Barral, M. A. A., & Carlos, J. C. T. (2021). Analysis of the Fintech Landscape in the Philippines (No. 2021-29). PIDS Discussion Paper Series.  https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/256864
  39. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers/book243616
  40. Akmila, F., Fadilah, I. N., & Dewi, H. R. (2023). Critical success factors of ERP implementation at retail franchise company in Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Accounting, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.20885/jca.vol5.iss2.art3
  41. Triple i Consulting. (2025, June 11). Annual audit requirements in the Philippines: Why corporations must comply. https://www.tripleiconsulting.com/annual-audit-requirements-philippines/
  42. UNESCAP (United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific). (2020). Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises’ Access to Finance in Samoa. https://www.yunbaogao.cn/index/partFile/5/unescap/2022-03/5_732.pdf
  43. Kanstrup, A. M., Bertelsen, P., Glasemann, M., & Boye, N. (2008). PDC’08 Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design. Design for More: an Ambient Perspective on Diabetes.
  44. Vink, J., Koskela-Huotari, K., Tronvoll, B., Edvardsson, B., & Wetter-Edman, K. (2021). Service ecosystem design: Propositions, process model, and future research agenda. Journal of Service Research, 24(2), 168-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670520952537
  45. van Bertalanffy, L. (2008). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. Braziller.
  46. Wacnik, P., Daly, S. R., & Verma, A. (2025). Participatory design: a systematic review and insights for future practice. Design Science, 11, e21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2025.10009
  47. Weill, P., & Ross, J. W. (2004). IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Harvard Business Press.
  48. World Bank Group. (2024). Development Topics. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/financialsector/brief/blockchain-audit-trails

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic