IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/safewp/214.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

All economic ideas are equal, but some are more equal than others: A differentiated perspective on macroprudential ideas and their implementation

Author

Listed:
  • Ibrocevic, Edin
  • Thiemann, Matthias

Abstract

In this study we investigate which economic ideas were prevalent in the macroprudential discourse post-crises in order to understand the availability of ideas for reform minded agents. We base our analysis on new findings in the field of ideational shifts and regulatory science, which posit that change-agents engage with new ideas pragmatically and strategically in their effort to have their economic ideas institutionalized. We argue that in these epistemic battles over new regulation, scientific backing by academia is the key resource determining the outcome. We show that the present reforms implemented internationally follow this pattern. In our analysis we contrast the entire discourse on systemic risk and macroprudential regulation with Borio's initial 2003 proposal for a macroprudential framework. We find that mostly cross-sectional measures targeted towards increasing the resilience of the financial system rather than inter-temporal measures dampening the financial cycle have been implemented. We provide evidence for the lacking support of new macroprudential thinking within academia and argue that this is partially responsible for the lack of anti-cyclical macroprudential regulation. Most worryingly, the financial cycle is largely absent in the academic discourse and is only tacitly assumed instead of fully fledged out in technocratic discourses, pointing to the possibility that no anti-cyclical measures will be forthcoming.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibrocevic, Edin & Thiemann, Matthias, 2018. "All economic ideas are equal, but some are more equal than others: A differentiated perspective on macroprudential ideas and their implementation," SAFE Working Paper Series 214, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:safewp:214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/179900/1/1024619516.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Helleiner, Eric, 2014. "The Status Quo Crisis: Global Financial Governance After the 2008 Meltdown," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199973637.
    2. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Dustin Tingley & Christopher Lucas & Jetson Leder‐Luis & Shana Kushner Gadarian & Bethany Albertson & David G. Rand, 2014. "Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 1064-1082, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Minchul Lee & Min Song, 2020. "Incorporating citation impact into analysis of research trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1191-1224, August.
    2. Grajzl, Peter & Murrell, Peter, 2021. "A machine-learning history of English caselaw and legal ideas prior to the Industrial Revolution I: generating and interpreting the estimates," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Parijat Chakrabarti & Margaret Frye, 2017. "A mixed-methods framework for analyzing text data: Integrating computational techniques with qualitative methods in demography," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 37(42), pages 1351-1382.
    4. McCauley, Robert N., 2015. "Does the US dollar confer an exorbitant privilege?," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-14.
    5. Savin, Ivan & Drews, Stefan & van den Bergh, Jeroen, 2021. "Free associations of citizens and scientists with economic and green growth: A computational-linguistics analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. Ilene Grabel, 2019. "Continuity, Discontinuity and Incoherence in the Bretton Woods Order: A Hirschmanian Reading," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(1), pages 46-71, January.
    7. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    8. Grace Skogstad & Matt Wilder, 2019. "Strangers at the gate: the role of multidimensional ideas, policy anomalies and institutional gatekeepers in biofuel policy developments in the USA and European Union," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(3), pages 343-366, September.
    9. Andreas Rehs, 2020. "A structural topic model approach to scientific reorientation of economics and chemistry after German reunification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1229-1251, November.
    10. Ulrich Fritsche & Johannes Puckelwald, 2018. "Deciphering Professional Forecasters’ Stories - Analyzing a Corpus of Textual Predictions for the German Economy," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201804, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    11. Daniel McDowell, 2019. "The (Ineffective) Financial Statecraft of China's Bilateral Swap Agreements," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(1), pages 122-143, January.
    12. Hager, Anselm & Hilbig, Hanno, 2020. "Does Public Opinion Affect Political Speech?," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 921-937.
    13. Seraphine F. Maerz & Carsten Q. Schneider, 2020. "Comparing public communication in democracies and autocracies: automated text analyses of speeches by heads of government," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 517-545, April.
    14. Dariusz Wójcik & Stefanos Ioannou, 2020. "COVID‐19 and Finance: Market Developments So Far and Potential Impacts on the Financial Sector and Centres," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 111(3), pages 387-400, July.
    15. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2021. "The legitimacy of wind power in Germany," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 54, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    16. Matthew J Salganik & Karen E C Levy, 2015. "Wiki Surveys: Open and Quantifiable Social Data Collection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Bongsug (Kevin) Chae & Eunhye (Olivia) Park, 2018. "Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): A Survey of Topics and Trends Using Twitter Data and Topic Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, June.
    18. Helmut K. Anheier & Robert Falkner & James M. Boughton & Domenico Lombardi & Anton Malkin, 2017. "The Limits of Global Economic Governance after the 2007–09 International Financial Crisis," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(s4), pages 30-41, June.
    19. Nuccio Ludovico & Federica Dessi & Marino Bonaiuto, 2020. "Stakeholders Mapping for Sustainable Biofuels: An Innovative Procedure Based on Computational Text Analysis and Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Juliet Johnson & Seçkin Köstem, 2016. "Frustrated Leadership: Russia's Economic Alternative to the West," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7(2), pages 207-216, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:safewp:214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/csafede.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.