Recentering central banks: Theorizing state-economy boundaries as central bank effects

Coombs, Nathan; Thiemann, Matthias

doi:10.1080/03085147.2022.2118450

Cited by 33 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some authors have described shadow banking as an attack on and deliberate confusion of the established frames of nation-state and taxation, locality and property, time and space (Bryan et al, 2016; Erturk, 2017). Others have described the recent developments in central banking as a hybridization of states and markets, with central banks paradoxically aligning with the ‘freedom of markets’ and engaging in the massive sovereign backstopping of markets that are, at the same time, celebrated as ‘laissez-faire’ markets (Birk and Thiemann, 2020; Braun, 2020; Walter and Wansleben, 2020; Wullweber, 2020), a condition which yields the ‘new normal’ of the ‘public-private hybridity’ of 21 st -century central banking (Coombs and Thiemann, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is a regulatory structure or regulatory complex, that is, a set of structures that are operative in the financial system and, in part, in the broader economic system but were imposed by the political system. This makes it a case of 'boundary structure' or 'boundary institution' (Guston, 1999(Guston, , 2001, 7 and indeed central banks have been analyzed as 'boundary organizations' doing 'boundary work' between state and economy recently (Coombs and Thiemann, 2022). The difference between the terms 'structure' and 'system' may not be immediately striking to the reader, but it makes a crucial difference in a systems theoretical frame.…”

Section: Uneven Systemnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The boundary contest that never was: Shadow banking and the relation between monetary system and financial system

Kuchler

2023

Social Science Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the relation between the monetary system and the financial system? The two used to be rather clearly separated, with the realm of money-currency-banking operating under close sovereign control and financial markets being left to the private activities of financial actors. However, the rise of shadow banking has somewhat blurred the picture. Shadow banking is done with financial instruments that operate in practically money-equivalent ways but are not officially categorized as ‘monetary’. This has created some ontological ambiguity and has bred some dispute between orthodox and heterodox economists as to whether or not shadow banking instruments ‘are’ money and should be subject to monetary regulation. The article draws on the sociological concepts of (i) categorization and commensuration, (ii) boundary contest, and (iii) system to give a sociological redescription of the situation. It discusses three hypotheses. (i) The financial system has expanded its horizon of operation through processes of commensuration and has come to include activities that were formerly done in the protected monetary niche. (ii) As a consequence, there have occurred significant boundary shifts between monetary and financial turfs, which have, however, not developed into a veritable boundary contest that would pit opposing coalitions and money definitions against each other. (iii) The reason for this is the asymmetric systemness of the two sides: While the financial system is a well-developed and expansionary system, the monetary ‘system’ is not really a system but a regulatory structure that lacks systemic powers of self-assertion and self-defense.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Uneven Systemnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The boundary contest that never was: Shadow banking and the relation between monetary system and financial system

Kuchler

2023

Social Science Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The concept of "boundary work" has recently been applied in the literature about central banks by Coombs and Thiemann (2022), who highlight the role of central banks in continually redefining the boundary between the state and the economy. As a "key node of a network of public and private institutions", central banks help to navigate and shape the state-economy interface (5).…”

Section: Central Banks As "Boundary Organizations"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Redefining Scientisation: Central Banks between Science and Politics

Goutsmedt,

Sergi

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces a new conceptual framework for examining the transformation of central banks’ activities at the intersection of science and politics. The article relies on the results of four historical case studies gathered by the special issue “The Scientization of Central Banks. National Patterns and Global Trends”—to which this article provides also an introduction.We start with an analysis of Martin Marcussen’s concept of “scientization”, originally formulated to describe the changes within central banks since the 2000s. After highlighting how Marcussen’s concept has raised different interpretations, we broaden our scope to examine how “scientization” is applied in the wider social sciences, extending beyond the study of central banks. This brings to the fore two ideas: scientization as “boundary work”(redrawing the line between “science” and “non-science”) happening both in the public-facing (“frontstage”) and internal (“backstage”) activities of organizations.Finally, we suggest how these two ideas can be used to reinterpret “scientization” of central banks as the emergence of central banks as “boundary organizations”. This reframing allows us to untangle and clarify the phenomena previously conflated under the original concept of scientization, offering a more coherent framework for ongoing research on central banks.

show abstract

“…Literature demonstrates that banks perform important role in an economy (Bitar and Tarazi, 2022;Coombs and Thiemann, 2022;Gautam et al, 2022;Karakaya et al, 2022;). Banks facilitate the ow of capital to the productive units of the economy (Bavoso, 2022;Ezema et al, 2022;Moro et al, 2022;Piracha, et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutions, Capital control Policy, and Liquidity Creation in Sub- Saharan Africa

Bawuah

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper examines the role of institutional quality in the relationship between capital control policy and bank liquidity creation in Sub-Saharan Africa. The paper uses international dataset of 63 banks in twenty (20) Sub-Saharan Africa countries from 2007–2019. The paper adopts panel fixed effect regression model for the estimation. The results indicate that institutional quality and capital control policy have direct positive impact on banks liquidity creation. The results further indicate that institutional quality plays positive and significant role in the relationship between capital control policy and bank liquidity creation. Regulatory capital, bank capital and bank size increase banks liquidity creation. However, floating exchange rate regime, bank risk and inflation do not increase bank liquidity creation.

show abstract

Recentering central banks: Theorizing state-economy boundaries as central bank effects

Cited by 33 publications

References 61 publications

The boundary contest that never was: Shadow banking and the relation between monetary system and financial system

The boundary contest that never was: Shadow banking and the relation between monetary system and financial system

Redefining Scientisation: Central Banks between Science and Politics

Institutions, Capital control Policy, and Liquidity Creation in Sub- Saharan Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About