Suchergebnisse

International audience ; The question of the relationship between monetary and fiscal authorities seems to be more complex than the recent debate on central bank independence would suggest. In the simple framework inspired by Sargent and Wallace (1976), the recipe for establishing an untarnished confidence in central bank money consisted in severing all links between governments and central bankers. In reality, however, monetary and fiscal authorities can hardly be separated at all: in fact, they are the two sides of the same coin – which is, the modern state. The idea that monetary and fiscal authorities can live their lives oblivious of each other does not seem to be validated by historical evidence.

International audience ; The question of the relationship between monetary and fiscal authorities seems to be more complex than the recent debate on central bank independence would suggest. In the simple framework inspired by Sargent and Wallace (1976), the recipe for establishing an untarnished confidence in central bank money consisted in severing all links between governments and central bankers. In reality, however, monetary and fiscal authorities can hardly be separated at all: in fact, they are the two sides of the same coin – which is, the modern state. The idea that monetary and fiscal authorities can live their lives oblivious of each other does not seem to be validated by historical evidence.

International audience ; As well as the current one, the wave of globalization culminated in 1913 was marked by increasing accumulation of foreign exchange reserves. But what did 'reserves' mean in the past, how were they managed, and how much relevant are the differences between then and now? This paper is the first attempt to investigate 19 th-century reserve management from central banks' perspective. Building on a significant case study (the National Bank of Belgium, i.e. the 'inventor' of foreign exchange policy, in the 1850s), it shows that risk management practices in the past differed considerably from nowadays. The structure of the international monetary system allowed central banks to minimize financial risk, while poor institutional design enhanced operational risk: this is in stark contrast with the present situation, in which operational risk has been minimized and financial risk has considerably increased. Yet 19 th-century reserve management was apparently not conducive to major losses for central banks, while the opposite seems to have been the case in the 21 st century.

International audience ; As well as the current one, the wave of globalization culminated in 1913 was marked by increasing accumulation of foreign exchange reserves. But what did 'reserves' mean in the past, how were they managed, and how much relevant are the differences between then and now? This paper is the first attempt to investigate 19 th-century reserve management from central banks' perspective. Building on a significant case study (the National Bank of Belgium, i.e. the 'inventor' of foreign exchange policy, in the 1850s), it shows that risk management practices in the past differed considerably from nowadays. The structure of the international monetary system allowed central banks to minimize financial risk, while poor institutional design enhanced operational risk: this is in stark contrast with the present situation, in which operational risk has been minimized and financial risk has considerably increased. Yet 19 th-century reserve management was apparently not conducive to major losses for central banks, while the opposite seems to have been the case in the 21 st century.

The ongoing financial crisis is shaking central bankers' certainties about their mission, and a rethinking of such mission can greatly benefit from a non-finalistic reassessment of how central banking has evolved over the centuries. This paper does so by taking a functional, instead of an institutional approach. The survey covers the provision of both microeconomic (financial stability) and macroeconomic (monetary stability) central banking functions in the West since the Middle Ages. The existence of a number of important trends (some unidirectional, some cyclical) is underlined. The findings have implications for the current debate on the institutional design of central banking, both in the U.S. and in the eurozone. Historical evidence suggests that neither changes in the organizational model of central banks nor government deficit monetization should necessarily be seen as evil; what is crucial to the success of any solution, is that the institutional agreement backing the existence of money-issuing organizations must be credible. The appendix provides a case study on Norway.

International audience ; Economic historians often take for granted the idea that financial centres have followed one standard bottom-up development process, gradually evolving from commercial hubs to banking places. This chapter suggests that such an interpretation is rather simplistic. The analysis is focused on a remarkable counterexample: the sudden emergence of Brussels as an international financial centre in the mid-19th century. The case study is articulated into five parts, each one looking at a different aspect of the growth of the new centre (capital resources, business elites, regulation, the domestic money market, and the foreign exchange market). The conclusion is that the top-down process observed in the Brussels experience sheds light on the fact that semi-institutional actors (such as central banks, or commercial banks connected to the political power) can successfully enact specific policies aimed at enhancing local financial development.

The ongoing financial crisis is shaking central bankers' certainties about their mission, and a rethinking of such mission can greatly benefit from a non-finalistic reassessment of how central banking has evolved over the centuries. This paper does so by taking a functional, instead of an institutional approach. The survey covers the provision of both microeconomic (financial stability) and macroeconomic (monetary stability) central banking functions in the West since the Middle Ages. The existence of a number of important trends (some unidirectional, some cyclical) is underlined. The findings have implications for the current debate on the institutional design of central banking, both in the U.S. and in the eurozone. Historical evidence suggests that neither changes in the organizational model of central banks nor government deficit monetization should necessarily be seen as evil; what is crucial to the success of any solution, is that the institutional agreement backing the existence of money-issuing organizations must be credible. The appendix provides a case study on Norway. ; publishedVersion