Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Financial crises can happen for a variety of reasons: (a) nobody really understands what is going on (the collective cognition paradigm); (b) some understand better than others and take advantage of their knowledge (the asymmetric information paradigm); (c) everybody understands, but crises are a natural part of the financial landscape (the costly enforcement paradigm); or (d) everybody understands, yet no one acts because private and social interests do not coincide (the collective action paradigm). The four paradigms have different and often conflicting prudential policy implications. This paper proposes and discusses three sets of reforms that would give due weight to the insights from the collective action and collective cognition paradigms by redrawing the regulatory perimeter to internalize systemic risk without promoting dynamic regulatory arbitrage; introducing a truly systemic liquidity regulation that moves away from a purely idiosyncratic focus on maturity mismatches; and building up the supervisory function while avoiding the pitfalls of expanded official oversight.

Banks & Banking Reform --- Debt Markets --- Emerging Markets --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial crises --- Financial development --- Financial Intermediation --- Financial policy --- Financial regulation --- Labor Policies --- Regulatory architecture

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This paper examines the conceptual foundations of macroprudential policy by reviewing the literature on financial frictions from a policy perspective that systematically links state interventions to market failures. The method consists in gradually incorporating into the Arrow-Debreu world a variety of frictions and sources of aggregate volatility and combining them along three basic dimensions: purely idiosyncratic vs. aggregate volatility, full vs. bounded rationality, and internalized vs. uninternalized externalities. The analysis thereby obtains eight "domains," four of which include aggregate volatility, hence call for macroprudential policy variants grounded on largely orthogonal rationales. Two of them emerge even assuming that externalities are internalized: one aims at offsetting the public moral hazard implications of (efficient but time inconsistent) post-crisis policy interventions, the other at maintaining principal-agent incentives continuously aligned along the cycle. Allowing for uninternalized externalities justifies two additional types of macroprudential policy, one aimed at aligning private and social interests, the other at tempering mood swings. Choosing a proper regulatory path is complicated by the fact that the relevance of frictions is likely to be state-dependent and that different frictions motivate different (and often conflicting) policies.

Banks & Banking Reform --- Bounded rationality --- Collective action --- Debt Markets --- Economic Theory & Research --- Emerging Markets --- Externalities --- Financial crises --- Financial frictions --- Financial policy --- Labor Policies --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Macroprudential policy --- Principal-agent problems --- Pro-cyclical financial markets --- Prudential oversight --- Regulatory architecture