Suchergebnisse

Digitalisation can be viewed as a major supply/technology shock affecting macroeconomic aggregates that are important for monetary policy, such as output, productivity, investment, employment and prices. This paper takes stock of developments in the digital economy and their possible impacts across the euro area and European Union (EU) economies. It also compares how these economies fare relative to other major economies such as that of the United States. The paper concludes that: (i) there is significant country heterogeneity across the EU in terms of the adoption of digital technologies, and most EU countries are falling behind competitors, particularly the United States; (ii) digitalisation is affecting the economy through a number of channels, including productivity, employment, competition and prices; (iii) digitalisation raises productivity and lowers prices, similarly to other supply/technology shocks; (iv) this has implications for monetary policy and its transmission; and (v) structural and other policies may need to be adapted for the euro area and EU countries to fully reap the potential gains from digitalisation, while maintaining inclusiveness.

Well-functioning economic structures are key for resilient and prospering euro area economies. The global financial and sovereign debt crises exposed the limited resilience of the euro area's economic structures. Economic growth was masking underlying weaknesses in several euro area countries. With the inception of the crises, significant efforts have been undertaken by Member States individually and collectively to strengthen resilience of economic structures and the smooth functioning of the euro area. National fiscal policies were consolidated to keep the increase in government debt contained and structural reform momentum increased notably in the second decade, particularly in those countries most hit by the crisis. The strengthened national economic structures were supported by a reformed EU crisis and economic governance framework. However, overall economic structures in euro area countries are still not fully commensurate with the requirements of a monetary union. Moreover, remaining challenges, such as population ageing, low productivity and the implications of digitalisation, will need to be addressed to increase economic resilience and long-term growth.

Since 2008, excess liquidity - defined as the sum of holdings of central bank reserves in excess of reserve requirements and holdings of equivalent central bank deposits - has tended to accumulate in specific euro area countries and in a small, slowly changing group of credit institutions. Despite the stability of the concentration of excess liquidity in specific countries over time, the relevance of individual drivers has changed. First, risk aversion has played a much smaller role in explaining the concentration since 2013 than it did at the time of "flight-to-quality" phenomena in the period 2010-12. Second, the location of the relevant market infrastructures (i.e. central securities depositories, securities settlement systems and TARGET2 accounts) used by counterparties that sold assets to the Eurosystem has been a more important driver directing flows in the period 2015-16. In addition, the more recent concentration of excess liquidity is explained by the combination of a number of factors, such as banks following strict internal credit limits, investment incentives created by yield differences across the euro area and the "home bias" in euro area government bond holdings. Overall, the net cross-border flows of liquidity that resulted also determined TARGET2 balances. At the individual bank level, when controlling for banks' capital, non-performing loans, credit risk and profitability, excess liquidity holdings in relation to total assets are found to be higher for smaller and better-capitalised banks, and for banking groups with liquidity centralised at the head institution. In addition, participation in Eurosystem longer-term refinancing operations and deposit inflows are associated with liquidity accumulation. Finally, new regulatory initiatives such as the liquidity coverage ratio are explained to be creating incentives to hold or not to distribute liquidity, thereby affecting its distribution.