The Experts below are selected from a list of 18 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Mattias Vermeiren - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Global Imbalances and the Instability of US Monetary Hegemony
Power and Imbalances in the Global Monetary System, 2020Co-Authors: Mattias VermeirenAbstract:In this chapter I re-examine the instability of US monetary hegemony from a Comparative Capitalism Perspective. As noted in the previous chapter, a prevailing interpretation in the international monetary power literature is that the main source of global instability arising from the monetary hegemony of the United States is the excessive growth of foreign liabilities associated with its structural power to delay adjustment, which tend to undermine foreign confidence in the stability of the dollar as the world’s key currency (KC). There appears to be a strong correspondence between this international monetary power interpretation of the instability of US monetary hegemony and the “Triffin dilemma” interpretation, which argues that growing foreign demand for dollar liquidity can only be met by growing US external deficits that risk eroding foreign confidence in the dollar. An important yet neglected question is whether the increase in foreign demand for dollar-denominated liquid assets — particularly in EMEs — has been exogenous or endogenous to the capacity of the United States to avoid the burden of adjustment: has the increase of dollar accumulation in EMEs since the second half of the 1990s been the cause or the effect of the macroeconomic expansion and the rise in the US current account deficit? By neglecting this question scholars of US monetary power have not only been able to account for the instability of US monetary hegemony but also failed to challenge the global savings glut (GSG) theory, which claims that the rise in the US current account deficit was caused by excess savings in EMEs and an associated exogenous rise in dollar accumulation (e.g. Bernanke 2005; Dumas 2008: Ferguson and Schlumarick 2007: Wolf 2008).
-
China’s state-permeated market economy and its constraints to the internationalization of the renminbi
International Politics, 2015Co-Authors: Miguel Otero-iglesias, Mattias VermeirenAbstract:The domestic institutions of China’s state-permeated market economy (SPME) have been conducive to the consolidation of an investment- and export-led growth model that has transformed China from a low- to middle-income country. Since the global financial crisis Chinese authorities have become increasingly disposed to internationalizing the renminbi (RMB) to address the external monetary vulnerabilities arising from their economy’s excessive dependency on the dollar. We adopt a Comparative Capitalism Perspective to argue that China’s international monetary ambition is incompatible with the domestic financial institutions of its SPME and growth model. The success of RMB internationalization hinges on the implementation of far-reaching domestic institutional reforms that would overhaul the key domestic financial institutions of its SPME. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the complementarities between these institutions and their role in China’s SPME and growth model, it is argued that the political capacity and resolve of the Chinese government to adopt these reforms can be called into question.
-
power and imbalances in the global monetary system a Comparative Capitalism Perspective
International Political Economy Series, 2014Co-Authors: Mattias VermeirenAbstract:0. Introduction Power and imbalances in the global monetary system The political economy of global monetary instability: Literature review A Comparative Capitalism Perspective on international monetary power Scope and structure of the book 1. International monetary power: A Comparative Capitalism Perspective Introduction The political economy of international monetary power International monetary power: concepts and definitions 2. The global imbalances and the instability of US monetary hegemony Introduction The domestic purpose of US monetary power US monetary power, finance-led growth and global imbalances Conclusion 3. Rising imbalances and monetary power in the Eurozone Introduction The domestic purpose of European monetary power Diverging growth regimes and monetary power in the Eurozone Conclusion 4. Reserve accumulation and the entrapment of Chinese monetary power Introduction The domestic purpose of Chinese monetary power Investment-led growth and the entrapment of Chinese monetary power Conclusion 5. International monetary power and global macroeconomic adjustment Introduction Macroeconomic adjustment and US monetary power after the crisis Macroeconomic adjustment and European monetary power after the cri-sis Macroeconomic adjustment and Chinese monetary power after the crisis Conclusion 6. Conclusion Power and imbalances in the global monetary system A Comparative Capitalism Perspective: Overview of main arguments The future of the global monetary system
-
international monetary power a Comparative Capitalism Perspective
2014Co-Authors: Mattias VermeirenAbstract:This chapter develops an analytical framework that combines the concepts of the international monetary power literature with those of the Comparative Capitalism literature. It will be argued that these two strands of literature can complement and reinforce each other, thereby offering new insights that will be elaborated in subsequent chapters. While both were developed in the 1990s and 2000s and share an interest in the issue of national autonomy in the context of financial globalization, there has been a remarkable lack of interaction between both approaches. The international monetary power literature has mostly focused on the international distribution of costs associated with the adjustment of nations to unsustainable balance-of-payments disequilibria — costs that are usually defined in terms of lost macroeconomic autonomy. Scholars working in this field have explained why these costs are typically distributed asymmetrically between nations and why some nations are able to avoid costs and/or deflect them onto weaker nations in the global monetary system. One of their main insights is that the capacity of a nation to avoid the burden of adjustment depends on the extent to which its currency is internationalized. At the same time, however, the literature on international monetary power has neglected the important role of domestic institutions in determining the specific macroeconomic goals nations pursue as well as for understanding the outcome of the international struggle over the distribution of adjustment: it will be maintained in this chapter that the domestic sources and purpose of a nation’s international monetary power are closely linked to the specific institutions of its national model of Capitalism.
-
Monetary power and EMU: macroeconomic adjustment and autonomy in the Eurozone
Review of International Studies, 2012Co-Authors: Mattias VermeirenAbstract:This article examines the impact of the establishment of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the introduction of the euro on the monetary power of its member states. Taking into consideration continuing capitalist variety among national political economies of the Eurozone, I examine the implications of EMU for the macroeconomic autonomy of different national models Capitalism. Drawing on a Comparative Capitalism Perspective, it is argued that the Eurozone's coordinated market economies – Germany in particular – have gained much more from the introduction of the euro in terms of monetary power than the other models. This argument will be based on an analysis of two key dimensions of EMU's macroeconomic governance regime: (1) exchange rate policymaking; and (2) the management of balance-of-payments.
Nora Lohmeyer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Comparative Capitalism Perspective on the privatization of governance: Business power, nonbusiness resistance, and state enforcement in Germany, 2000-2010
Socio-economic Review, 2020Co-Authors: Rami Kaplan, Nora LohmeyerAbstract:Abstract The privatization of governance including the institution of nonbinding corporate social responsibility (CSR) frameworks to govern the social and economic conduct of large corporations is a controversial global process, which unfolds between and within nations. Studies of transnational private governance suggest that CSR frameworks reflect bargains between business and nonbusiness actors, reached on the background of the unfeasibility of intergovernmental binding regulation. But what explains the rise of such multi-stakeholder initiatives on the national level—and particularly in European coordinated market economies—where public forms of governance are historically well-institutionalized and more feasible? Based on our power resource theory (PRT)-informed study of Germany’s adoption of a national CSR framework, we argue that such settings motivate nonbusiness actors to resist, rather than engage in, business-driven processes of the privatization of governance. The struggle is decided by the state, which in Germany used its public power to enforce multi-stakeholder consensus around privatized forms. Our findings thus extend scholarly recognition of the role played by public authority in the privatization of governance. More generally, we promote a Comparative Capitalism Perspective for the study of the politics of private governance.
Rami Kaplan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Comparative Capitalism Perspective on the privatization of governance: Business power, nonbusiness resistance, and state enforcement in Germany, 2000-2010
Socio-economic Review, 2020Co-Authors: Rami Kaplan, Nora LohmeyerAbstract:Abstract The privatization of governance including the institution of nonbinding corporate social responsibility (CSR) frameworks to govern the social and economic conduct of large corporations is a controversial global process, which unfolds between and within nations. Studies of transnational private governance suggest that CSR frameworks reflect bargains between business and nonbusiness actors, reached on the background of the unfeasibility of intergovernmental binding regulation. But what explains the rise of such multi-stakeholder initiatives on the national level—and particularly in European coordinated market economies—where public forms of governance are historically well-institutionalized and more feasible? Based on our power resource theory (PRT)-informed study of Germany’s adoption of a national CSR framework, we argue that such settings motivate nonbusiness actors to resist, rather than engage in, business-driven processes of the privatization of governance. The struggle is decided by the state, which in Germany used its public power to enforce multi-stakeholder consensus around privatized forms. Our findings thus extend scholarly recognition of the role played by public authority in the privatization of governance. More generally, we promote a Comparative Capitalism Perspective for the study of the politics of private governance.
Miguel Otero-iglesias - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
China’s state-permeated market economy and its constraints to the internationalization of the renminbi
International Politics, 2015Co-Authors: Miguel Otero-iglesias, Mattias VermeirenAbstract:The domestic institutions of China’s state-permeated market economy (SPME) have been conducive to the consolidation of an investment- and export-led growth model that has transformed China from a low- to middle-income country. Since the global financial crisis Chinese authorities have become increasingly disposed to internationalizing the renminbi (RMB) to address the external monetary vulnerabilities arising from their economy’s excessive dependency on the dollar. We adopt a Comparative Capitalism Perspective to argue that China’s international monetary ambition is incompatible with the domestic financial institutions of its SPME and growth model. The success of RMB internationalization hinges on the implementation of far-reaching domestic institutional reforms that would overhaul the key domestic financial institutions of its SPME. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the complementarities between these institutions and their role in China’s SPME and growth model, it is argued that the political capacity and resolve of the Chinese government to adopt these reforms can be called into question.