scholarly journals Private Bank Money vs Central Bank Money: A Historical Lesson for CBDC Introduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Grodecka-Messi
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens van 't Klooster ◽  
Steffen Murau

This article proposes a conception of monetary sovereignty that recognizes the reality of today’s global credit money system. Monetary sovereignty is typically used in a Westphalian sense to denote the ability of states to issue and regulate their own currency. This article rejects the Westphalian conception. Instead, it proposes a conception of effective monetary sovereignty that focuses attention on what states are actually able to do in the era of financial globalization. The conception fits the hybridity of the modern credit money system by acknowledging the crucial role not only of central bank money but also of money issued by regulated banks and unregulated shadow banks. These institutions often operate ‘offshore’, outside of a state’s legal jurisdiction, which makes monetary governance more difficult. Monetary sovereignty consists in the ability of states to effectively govern these different segments of the monetary system and thereby achieve their economic policy objectives.


1999 ◽  
Vol 99 (92) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alain Ize ◽  
Arto Kovanen ◽  
Timo Henckel ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Quinn ◽  
William Roberds

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. 68-77
Author(s):  
D. Kochergin

Received 28.07.2020. The article examines issues related to the introduction of central bank digital currencies (CBDC) for retail payments and wholesale settlements. The study defines and classifies central bank digital currencies, researches the main models of CBDC systems. The article also analyzes the features of various national projects for issuing Central bank digital currencies. The paper uses methods of economic-statistical and functional-structural analysis. The study concludes that CBDC are a new form of central bank money. Digital currencies can be issued in various issuing systems for the purpose of retail payments or wholesale settlements. Among the models of CBDC systems for retail payments (R-CBDC) the direct system model is the most attractive for its simplicity. This model eliminates the dependence of the Central bank on any financial and payment intermediaries. Models of synthetic and hybrid R-CBDC systems are characterized by reliability and speed in processing multiple transactions which makes them the most promising for implementation. Among the models of CBDC systems for wholesale payments (W-CBDC) the model of the system with a universal digital currency (U-W-CBDC) may be the most suitable for eliminating the main disadvantages of modern cross-border payment systems. However, a large number of technological and financial changes as well as the high operating costs of the U-W-CBDC can make such systems difficult to implement for non-developed financial market infrastructure countries. National financial regulators have different motivations for issuing digital currencies. The main advantages of digital currencies for retail payments may consist in providing users with highly liquid, low-risk, universally available means of payment. The main advantages of wholesale digital currencies are that they offer faster, safer, cheaper cross-border payments. The most advanced projects for issuing R-CBDC can be considered DCEP (People’s Bank of China) E-krona (Central Bank of Sweden). The most successful pilot projects for issuing W-CBDC are the projects Jasper (Central Bank of Canada) and Ubin (Monetary Authority of Singapore), which were able to achieve interoperability in conducting cross-border payments. Currently most CBDC are retail based on the use of distributed ledger technology and implemented in the form of DLT-tokens. Countries that develop digital currency systems can be divided into three groups. The first group is countries where the introduction of CBDC can be designed to support the national demand for central bank money (Sweden, Norway, Singapore, etc.). The second group – countries for which the adoption of digital currencies can afford to keep the place of national currencies in international settlements (USA and EU) or expanding the use of national currencies at the international level (China). The third group represents countries for which the introduction of digital currencies may be associated with the control of national monetary circulation and de-dollarization of the financial system (Uruguay, South Africa, Cambodia, etc.).


1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Henckel ◽  
Alain Ize ◽  
Arto Kovanen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document