Research Programs
Monetary Policy and Financial Structure
This program explores the structure of markets and institutions operating in the financial sector. Research builds on the work of the late Distinguished Scholar Hyman P. Minsky—notably, his financial instability hypothesis—and explores the institutional, regulatory, and market arrangements that contribute to financial instability. Research also examines policies—such as changes to the regulatory structure and the development of new types of institutions—necessary to contain instability.Recent research has concentrated on the structure of financial markets and institutions, with the aim of determining whether financial systems are still subject to the risk of failing. Issues explored include the extent to which domestic and global economic events (such as the crises in Asia and Latin America) coincide with the types of instabilities Minsky describes, and involve analyses of his policy recommendations for alleviating instability and other economic problems.
Other subjects covered include the distributional effects of monetary policy, central banking and structural issues related to the European Monetary Union, and the role of finance in small business investment.
Program Publications
-
Working Paper No. 1072 | December 2024This paper analyzes the dynamics of Canadian dollar–denominated (CAD) interest rate swap yields. It applies autoregressive distributive lag (ARDL) models, using monthly time series data, to estimate the effects of the current short-term interest rate and other relevant macro-financial variables on interest rate swap yields. It shows that the current short-term interest rate is a crucial driver of the swap yields of different maturity tenors. Similar patterns of interest rate swaps denominated in other hard currencies, such as the US dollar, euro, British pound sterling, and Japanese yen, have been discerned in previous empirical research testing the Keynesian hypothesis, which maintains that the current short-term interest rate has a decisive influence on the long-term interest rate. Thus, the findings of this paper lend additional support to the
Keynesian hypothesis by showing that the same pattern holds for CAD interest rate swap yields. The results obtained in the paper can be useful for portfolio managers, corporate leaders, and policymakers.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Tanweer Akram Khawaja MamunRelated Topic(s):
-
Working Paper No. 1071 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 14, May 2023
The Central Bank of the United States, the Federal Reserve, has a dual mandate to maintain both full employment and price stability. However, inflation-fighting had always eclipsed the full employment objective without much accountability. Today, the Federal Reserve provides regular testimony before Congress on how well it is achieving its dual mandate. Professor Galbraith wrote that section into law (among others), which requires the Federal Reserve to report to Congress on its work.
According to Professor Galbraith, the law intentionally kept the scope of Federal Reserve policy wide. The purpose was not to impose some economic theory on the policymaker, but to promote an open dialogue between the Federal Reserve and Congress over what monetary policy is and does. And yet, the legacy of monetarism continues to influence monetary policy today: the belief that there is a trade-off between inflation and unemployment firmly guides contemporary Federal Reserve policy. Even as the Federal Reserve’s own research finds that labor markets are not the driver of inflation, economists, including at the Fed, continue to insist that unemployment and labor market slack are the way to fight price increases. In this keynote, Professor Galbraith highlights other, more effective and enlightened ways of dealing with inflation.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Related Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1070 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 20, June 2024
Scholars and affiliates of the Levy Economics Institute have long demonstrated a granular understanding of the "operations" of money, which entails understanding the financial system's law and technology (Grey 2019, Tymoigne 2014, Fullwiler 2010, Bell and Wray 2002-3, Bell 2000). During the dot-com bubble, many Levy-affiliated economists underscored the relationship between government fiscal surpluses and unsustainable private debt (Godley and Wray 1999). Recently, scholars have written about the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (Grey 2023; Tankus 2023) and resurgent speculation in the tech sector (Veneroso and Pasquali 2021). These are but a few examples.
Here, I present some brief thoughts on money as a technology—money itself. I argue there is value in thinking of money not only as a legal institution, political, economic, or social relation but as technology. The exercise sharpens our vision of the future of money even as we continue to believe in radical uncertainty.
I address a few points in this essay. First, I make the case for money as technology. I then survey three applications: 1) the trajectory of state money as a technology of public finance and its relationship to the suppression of indigenous and non-state monies, 2) the regulation of money-like liabilities issued by technology companies, which operate according to the accumulative logic of Silicon Valley rather than Wall Street, and 3) money’s future as a technology of surveillance, discipline, and punishment. Finally, I call for scholarship to inform a vision of money as a more democratic technology (per the mission of the Economic Democracy Initiative and Levy Economics Institute).Download:Associated Program(s):Author(s):Raúl A. CarrilloRelated Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1069 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 19, March 2024
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is criticized for "derisking" private investment by increasing the gains to private firms. The derisking critique argues that the IRA insufficiently disciplines private firms; it does not utilize legal or financial penalties which would force firms to undertake green investment and bar emissions-intensive investment. This paper answers that critique by providing a Post-Keynesian theory of capital expenditure. It argues all industrial policies promote investment by removing or mitigating risks in an environment of fundamental uncertainty. Industrial policies tackle different risks and can be assessed or compared on their effectiveness in doing so. An insufficient investment growth rate need not be an indication of their failure, but that complementary policies are required to mitigate risks or make risks calculable. For instance, the IRA’s uncapped Investment Tax Credit (ITC) increases clean energy investment by reducing project reliance on expensive debt financing. The ITC does not address other barriers to clean energy investment: transmission and distribution, permitting, or the need for clean firm resources. This is not a failure of discipline, but rather an indication that more state intervention must facilitate rapid decarbonization. The derisking critique’s emphasis on disciplining private firms into investment reallocation underestimates real obstacles to investment, particularly how those obstacles shape choices faced by firms. It also affects the character of investment itself, making it inaccurate to describe investment as the allocation of fixed financial resources. The derisking critique lacks a mechanism connecting financial or legal disciplinary measures on firms to an increase in green capital expenditure. This causes the derisking critique to miss a more productive avenue for investigating industrial policy conditionalities: linking them to a broader state-led coordination of varying industrial policy priorities, the timing of capital expenditure to meet them, and seizing of opportunities presented by their success.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Chirag LalaRelated Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1068 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 17, March 2024
This paper challenges the prevailing view in the sovereign debt literature by arguing that sovereign debt markets, in many respects, behave similarly to other credit markets. These markets are hierarchical rather than flat, inherently hybrid in nature, blending elements of public order and private markets, and regularly suffer from liquidity stress. Therefore, sovereigns, similarly to private actors in the market, are subject to liquidity stress and insolvency crises in a way that is integral to the global financial architecture. Critically, the legal and institutional design of the international monetary system exacerbates this stress. Structural asymmetries, notably the uneven distribution of monetary power, lead to liquidity stress being more pronounced in the periphery than at the apex or core of the system, rendering the former inherently more vulnerable to sovereign debt crises.
The paper argues that such considerations should assume a central role in global policy discussions concerning the most appropriate mechanisms for addressing sovereign debt crises. It advocates for a reformed global financial architecture, emphasizing the necessity of a legally binding framework for sovereign debt restructuring that draws upon principles of corporate restructuring law, with the UK Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) providing relevant analogies. This approach aims to ensure timely, equitable, and efficient restructuring processes, thereby confronting the challenges posed by the current ad hoc and often inequitable sovereign debt restructuring processes.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Karina Patricio Ferreira LimaRelated Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1067 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 16, March 2024
Most debates and policy proposals about Global South countries’ external debt problem take for granted the view that it is normal for their governments to issue debts denominated in foreign currencies. This paper tries to challenge this widely held and usually unquestioned assumption by relying on Modern Money Theory (MMT) insights. The author argues that the MMT lens helps us understand the root causes of the foreign debt problem of Southern countries, those located in Africa in particular, to clarify the ordinarily mis-specified concept of “external constraint” or “balance-of-payments constraint” and to envisage progressive domestic policy measures that are under their control.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Ndongo Samba SyllaRelated Topic(s):Region(s):Africa -
Working Paper No. 1064 | December 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 08, 2022
This paper evaluates the relationship between monetary and fiscal policy and the relative effectiveness of macroeconomic stabilization through the lens of Modern Money Theory (MMT). We articulate previously-neglected aspects of monetary sovereignty to offer a new interpretation of the Bernanke Doctrine that emerged in the wake of the 2008 Global Financial crisis. This Doctrine validated key MMT precepts and paved the way for fiscal policy activism in response to COVID19. The paper argues that fiscal and monetary policy coordination is not new or rare. It is an intrinsic feature of sovereign monetary regimes, allowing for more effective policy responses to financial crises or pandemics. To the extent that monetary policy is able to stabilize an unstable economy, it is largely due to its fiscal components. This recognition also calls for a rethinking of fiscal policy.Download:Associated Program(s):Author(s):Related Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1062 | December 2024This paper examines heterodox theories of the determinants of the value of money. Orthodox approaches that tie money’s value to relative scarcity of money or to the price level are rejected as inconsistent with the monetary theory of production embraced by heterodox traditions linked to Marx, Veblen, and Keynes. This paper examines and integrates (1) recent contributions by David Graeber and Duncan Foley that reinterpret Marx’s labor theory of value, (2) the interpretation of Keynes’s liquidity preference theory as a theory of asset pricing that began with Sraffa and was further developed by Minsky and Kregel, and (3) Modern Money Theory’s approach to sovereign currency. As Heilbroner argued, money is central to the internal logic of the capitalist system, and is what makes capitalism truly different from other social organizations. Our theory of value informs our beliefs about how the deep structure of the economic system generates a system of prices denominated in the money of account.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Related Topic(s):
-
Working Paper No. 1061 | November 2024Originally issued as EDI Working Paper No. 04, 2022
Drumetz and Pfister make several claims about the inadequacy and fallacies of Modern Money Theory (MMT) and conclude that MMT is nothing more than a political manifesto; there are no theoretical and empirical foundations behind it. This paper addresses this last point by focusing on the fiscal and monetary policy aspects of their criticisms. Contrary to what they claim, MMT is backed by a large body of empirical evidence, a rich institutional analysis, and a well-developed theoretical framework (including mathematical models). MMT provides a detailed analysis of the coordination between the fiscal and monetary branches of government, emphasizes that fiscal deficits are a stylized fact, and uses theoretical tools grounded in institutional realities to explain this stylized fact. In line with a large body of work, MMT concludes that fiscal policy, the provision of an elastic currency, and financial regulations have contributed to economic stability and growth; however government involvement can be improved by changing the policymaking praxis. MMT also concludes that fine-tuning of the economy via monetary policy is not effective and does not attribute the “great moderation” to better monetary management.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Related Topic(s): -
Working Paper No. 1058 | November 2024
Retracing European and Chinese Monetary Thoughts on Chartalism, Nominalism, and the Origins of Monetary Systems
A monetary approach that combines Chartalism, Nominalism, and Command origins of monetary systems is often deemed to have emerged only recently, while the Aristotelian approach (Commodity, Metallism, and Market origins of monetary systems) is the only one that existed until the end of the eighteenth/early-nineteenth century. In the major studies of the history of monetary thought, the Chartalism-Nominalism-Command approach is mostly left unmentioned, or at best reduced to an incoherent banality. The paper shows that this approach has a long and rich intellectual history among European monetary thinkers. In Europe, Plato was its first exponent, albeit in a very rudimentary way, and so one may call it the “Platonic approach.” It is developed by Roman legists (such as Javolenus, Paulus, and Ulpian) and Medieval legists (such as Du Moulin, Hotman, and Butigella) who note that coins are similar to securities and that debts are serviced when nominal sums are paid rather than specific coins tendered. During the Renaissance and early modern period, a series of scholars and financial practitioners (such as Law, Dutot, Thomas Smith, and James Taylor) emphasize the financial logic behind monetary mechanics and the similarity of coins and notes. In the twentieth century, authors such as Innes, Knapp, Keynes, and Commons build onto the groundwork provided by these past scholars. In China, the Chartalism-Nominalism-Command approach develops independently and dominates from the beginning under Confucian and Legist thoughts. They emphasize the statecraft origins of monetary systems, the role of tax redemption, and the irrelevance of the material used to make monetary instruments. Clay, lead, paper, iron, copper, and tin are normal and convenient means to make monetary instruments, they are not special/emergency materials. The essence of a monetary instrument is not defined by its materiality but rather by its chartality, that is, by the promise it embeds. The Platonic approach rejects the categories and conceptualizations used by the Aristotelian approach and develops new ones, which leads to a different set of inquiries and understanding of monetary phenomena, problems, and history.Download:Associated Program:Author(s):Related Topic(s):
Program Scholars
Research Programs
