Blog Post

Global financial reform and cross-border integration: Asian leadership needed?

Before 2007-08, most global financial reform initiatives were based on a near consensus about the benefits from the free circulation of capital between jurisdictions, and from free cross-border competition between financial services firms. As a consequence of the financial crisis in the US and Europe, however, this near consensus can no longer be taken for […]

By: Date: October 23, 2012 Topic: Macroeconomic policy

Before 2007-08, most global financial reform initiatives were based on a near consensus about the benefits from the free circulation of capital between jurisdictions, and from free cross-border competition between financial services firms. As a consequence of the financial crisis in the US and Europe, however, this near consensus can no longer be taken for granted. One implication is the increasingly tangible possibility of at least a partial fragmentation of the global financial system.

There are many indications that this fragmentation is becoming more likely. Rating agencies were unregulated in most of the world outside the US before the crisis (South Korea being one exception), but the G20 recommended they should be regulated and supervised by all major jurisdictions, with the risk of incompatible regulatory frameworks or inconsistent supervisory practices leading to geographical divergences in rating methodologies within the same rating agency. Another example is over-the-counter derivatives, the trading of which was hitherto cleared bilaterally by market participants, but for which the G20 mandated central clearing in regulated clearing houses, starting in 2013. Many investors fear a division of corresponding markets along the borders of country or currency areas. A third indication is the growing acceptance by international financial institutions, particularly the International Monetary Fund (IMF), of the adequateness of capital control measures under certain conditions, against the previously received wisdom of the so-called Washington consensus.

Around the globe, supervisors have nudged banks to ring-fence assets and maximise lending in their respective jurisdictions, in some cases pushing for splitting off of activities previously conducted through branches. In several countries that have run into fiscal difficulties, domestically-headquartered banks have been encouraged to increase their purchases of national sovereign debt. “Financial repression,” an expression long reserved to economic historians, has re-entered the mainstream financial vocabulary. These developments have been particularly striking in the euro area, where countries are in principle committed to total openness to capital flows, but where an abrupt U-turn from financial integration to financial fragmentation has been identified by policy authorities including the European Central Bank. The developments are by no means unique to Europe, though, and variations of the same themes have been observed in most if not all main economic regions.

Simultaneously, the pre-crisis momentum for harmonisation of global financial standards has run into some setbacks in crisis-affected countries. The US has delayed any decision about the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards, which it had endorsed for US-listed foreign firms in 2007 and had seemed on the verge of extending to US-listed issuers in 2008. In another example, the European Union, after having championed the global use of the Basel II Accord on capital standards during the 2000s, now seems set to adopt legislation that the Basel Committee has deemed materially non-compliant with the new Basel 3 Accord that was adopted in 2010. For all the G20 talk about global solutions to global problems, financial reform has often seemed to be more driven by politics in the post-crisis context than in the previous period – and as the saying goes, all politics is local.

This new reality creates an unprecedented challenge for Asian policymakers. Asia has gained from dynamic financial development in the past two decades, and is entering a new phase in which cross-border financial openness could have a particularly beneficial impact, leading to better capital allocation and favouring the diffusion of efficient financing mechanisms. Generally speaking, Asian policymakers arguably have a vested interest in the continuation or even the acceleration of global financial integration. Until recently, they could take for granted that such integration would continue as a natural consequence of commitments to financial openness in both the US and Europe, which together dominate those global institutions that most influence the global financial order: the IMF, the International Accounting Standards Board, or the Basel cluster around the Bank for International Settlements.

But this assumption that the West will champion further cross-border openness of the global financial system can no longer be taken for granted. As a consequence, Asian policymakers may have to take a more prominent leadership position in global financial reform discussions to make sure that the impetus towards global financial integration is not reversed. This would be a new situation. Some Asian policymakers may feel ill-prepared for it, but even so could find its implications difficult to escape.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

May
25
14:30

How can we support and restructure firms hit by the COVID-19 crisis?

What are the vulnerabilities and risks in the enterprise sector and how prepared are countries to handle a large-scale restructuring of businesses?

Speakers: Ceyla Pazarbasioglu and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

May - Jun
31-1
10:30

MICROPROD Final Event

Final conference of the MICROPROD project

Speakers: Carlo Altomonte, Eric Bartelsman, Marta Bisztray, Italo Colantone, Maria Demertzis, Filippo di Mauro, Wolfhard Kaus, Steffen Müller, Gianluca Santoni, Verena Plümpe, Andrea Roventini, Valerie Smeets, Nicola Viegi, Markus Zimmermann and Javier Miranda Topic: Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

[Cancelled] Shifting taxes in order to achieve green goals

[This event is cancelled until further notice] How could shifting the tax burden from labour to pollution and resources help the EU reach its climate goals?

Speakers: Niclas Poitiers and Femke Groothuis Topic: Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 12, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

How are crises changing central bank doctrines?

How is monetary policy evolving in the face of recent crises? With central banks taking on new roles, how accountable are they to democratic institutions?

Speakers: Maria Demertzis, Benoît Coeuré, Pervenche Berès, Hans-Helmut Kotz and Athanasios Orphanides Topic: Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 11, 2022
Read article Download PDF More by this author
 

Book/Special report

European governanceInclusive growth

Bruegel annual report 2021

The Bruegel annual report provides a broad overview of the organisation's work in the previous year.

By: Bruegel Topic: Banking and capital markets, Digital economy and innovation, European governance, Global economy and trade, Green economy, Inclusive growth, Macroeconomic policy Date: May 6, 2022
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

European governance

Fiscal support and monetary vigilance: economic policy implications of the Russia-Ukraine war for the European Union

Policymakers must think coherently about the joint implications of their actions, from sanctions on Russia to subsidies and transfers to their own citizens, and avoid taking measures that contradict each other. This is what we try to do in this Policy Contribution, focusing on the macroeconomic aspects of relevance for Europe.

By: Olivier Blanchard and Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European governance, Macroeconomic policy Date: April 29, 2022
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Working Paper

The low productivity of European firms: how can policies enhance the allocation of resources?

A summary of the most important policy lessons from research undertaken in the MICROPROD project work package 4, related to the allocation of the factors of production, with a special focus on the weak dynamism of European small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

By: Grégory Claeys, Marie Le Mouel and Giovanni Sgaravatti Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 25, 2022
Read article More on this topic
 

External Publication

What drives implementation of the European Union’s policy recommendations to its member countries?

Article published in the Journal of Economic Policy Reform.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 13, 2022
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

Working Paper

Measuring the intangible economy to address policy challenges

The purpose of the first work package of the MICROPROD project was to improve the firm-level data infrastructure, expand the measurement of intangible assets and enable cross-country analyses of these productivity trends.

By: Marie Le Mouel Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: April 11, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Macroeconomic and financial stability in changing times: conversation with Andrew Bailey

Guntram Wolff will be joined in conversation by Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England.

Speakers: Andrew Bailey and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: March 28, 2022
Read article
 

Opinion

European governance

How to reconcile increased green public investment needs with fiscal consolidation

The EU’s ambitious emissions reduction targets will require a major increase in green investments. This column considers options for increasing public green investment when major consolidations are needed after the fiscal support provided during the pandemic. The authors make the case for a green golden rule allowing green investment to be funded by deficits that would not count in the fiscal rules. Concerns about ‘greenwashing’ could be addressed through a narrow definition of green investments and strong institutional scrutiny, while countries with debt sustainability concerns could initially rely only on NGEU for their green investment.

By: Zsolt Darvas and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European governance, Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Date: March 8, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

The week inflation became entrenched

The events that have unfolded since 24 February have solved one dispute: inflation is no longer temporary.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Macroeconomic policy Date: March 8, 2022
Load more posts