Nu este disponibil în limba română
Richard Senner
- 29 August 2024
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 2978Details
- Abstract
- Over the last decades, macro-economists have renewed their efforts to reduce the gap between monetary macroeconomics and real-world central banking. This paper reviews how macroeconomics has since 2016 approached the possible introduction of retail central bank digital currencies (CBDC). A review of the literature reveals that macroeconomic models of CBDC often rely on CBDC design features and narratives which are no longer in line with the one of central banks actually working on CBDC. In particular, the literature often (i) does not take into account the nature of central banks’ CBDC issuance plans as a “conservative” reaction to profound technological and preferential shifts in the use of money as a means of payments, (ii) does not start from design features communicated by central banks, such as no-remuneration, quantity limits, access restrictions, and automated sweeping functionality linking CBDC wallets with commercial bank accounts; (iii) does not explain well enough the difference between CBDC and banknotes within their macro-economic models, apart from remuneration (which central banks actually do not foresee); and (iv) assume that CBDC will lead to a significant increase in the total holdings of central bank money in the economy, although (i) and (ii) make this unlikely.
- JEL Code
- E3 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles
E5 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit
G1 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets
- 17 May 2024
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 2942Details
- Abstract
- While global supply chains have recently gained attention in the context of the Covid-related crisis as well as the war in Ukraine, their role in transmitting and amplifying climate-related physical risks across countries has received surprisingly little attention. To address this shortcoming, this paper for the first time combines country-level GDP losses due to climate-related physical risks with a global Input-Output model. More specifically, climate-related GDP-at-risk data are used to quantify the potential direct impact of physical risks on GDP at the country or regional level. This direct impact on GDP is then used to shock a global Input-Output (IO) model so that the propagation of the initial shock to country-sectors around the world becomes observable. The findings suggest that direct GDP loss estimates can severely underestimate the ultimate impact of physical risk because trade can lead to losses that are up to 30 times higher in the EA than what looking at the direct impacts would suggest. However, trade can also mitigate losses if substitutability across country-sectors is possible. Future research should (i) develop more granular, holistic, and forward-looking global physical risk data and (ii) examine more closely the role of both partially substitutable outputs, and critical outputs that are less substitutable or not substitutable at all, such as in the food sector.
- JEL Code
- E01 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→General→Measurement and Data on National Income and Product Accounts and Wealth, Environmental Accounts
Q54 : Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics, Environmental and Ecological Economics→Environmental Economics→Climate, Natural Disasters, Global Warming
Q56 : Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics, Environmental and Ecological Economics→Environmental Economics→Environment and Development, Environment and Trade, Sustainability, Environmental Accounts and Accounting, Environmental Equity, Population Growth
F18 : International Economics→Trade→Trade and Environment
- 15 January 2024
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 2887Details
- Abstract
- Rapid and large deposit outflows from banks have regained attention in the context of the March 2023 demises of Credit Suisse, SVB and other regional US banks. Moreover, the possible introduction of CBDC or a marked success of stablecoins are perceived as additional clouds over the future of deposit funding. While the bank run literature rarely pays attention to where bank deposits can flow to, this paper distinguishes the different flow of funds mechanics across all possible destinations and reviews for each the current and prospective future factors that may contribute to the observed increase of the speed and size of bank runs. While some of these factors can be contained through policy measures, others, like the intensified competition between banks will inevitably stay, and bank balance sheet management and liquidity regulation need to accept the new normal of somewhat less stable and more expensive sight deposits.
- JEL Code
- E42 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Monetary Systems, Standards, Regimes, Government and the Monetary System, Payment Systems
E51 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Money Supply, Credit, Money Multipliers
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors
- 30 May 2023
- FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLEFinancial Stability Review Issue 1, 2023Details
- Abstract
- Banks are connected to non-bank financial intermediation (NBFI) sector entities via loans, securities and derivatives exposures, as well as funding dependencies. Linkages with the NBFI sector expose banks to liquidity, market and credit risks. Funding from NBFI entities would appear to be the most likely and strongest spillover channel, considering that NBFI entities maintain their liquidity buffers primarily as deposits and very short-term repo transactions with banks. At the same time, direct credit exposures are smaller and are often related to NBFI entities associated with banking groups. Links with NBFI entities are highly concentrated in a small group of systemically important banks, whose sizeable capital and liquidity buffers are essential to mitigate spillover risks.
- JEL Code
- G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G22 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Insurance, Insurance Companies, Actuarial Studies
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors