MONETARY CIRCULATION AND BANKS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE MAIN ECONOMIC SCHOOLS

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

  Maryna Korol

  Ihor Korol

  Olena Zayats

Abstract

The topicality of the research lies in the fact that the long-term evolution of financial markets, reinforced by global transformations, has led to the development of convergent processes in banking activities in the presence of significant paradigmatic differences between the major banking systems of the world. The existing peculiarities in the mechanisms and methods of regulation of the banking sector within individual countries have caused drastic changes in views on the nature of the bank and its activities. The traditional view of banks as institutions of financial intermediation, providing the exchange of monetary assets between the owners of savings and borrowers, does not provide for the creation of new money. Instead, proponents of the alternative viewpoint emphasize that in today's world banks finance borrowers mainly through the mechanism of money emission. Both points of view are present to varying degrees in various theoretical and conceptual approaches to understanding the essence of the bank as an institution of financial intermediation. The current economic realities require a detailed study of national banking systems, which largely developed historically, and methodological aspects of their evolution in the context of global transformations. The research subject. In the process of evolution of theoretical and conceptual approaches to the definition of the essence of money, banks, the banking system, the prevailing point of view on this issue has not yet taken a definite form. Nevertheless, the recognition of the effectiveness of banks as a factor of economic growth brings together the positions of competing schools of economic theory. Banks become a factor in the investment process even in the theoretical models of the neoclassical school, which traditionally denies the dependence of economic growth on the money supply. Endogenous growth models recognize the role of banks primarily as a factor in accumulating capital and increasing savings, as well as a mediator between owners of savings and borrowers. Although the Keynesian school of thought initially gave little weight to the functioning of the banking system, neo-Keynesian models have attempted to explain the importance of confidence in the banking system and the need for sound regulatory constraints. The above-mentioned has urged us to carry out this research. The methodological framework of the research is based on an analysis of research on the global debate about the nature of banks in the economy and the architecture of monetary policy. A wide range of theoretical and empirical research methods were used: systematic analysis, synthesis and generalization to formulate conclusions. The aim of the research is to generalize and systematize the evolution of perspectives on money in the interpretations of today’s main economic schools. Conclusion. The findings consist of a conceptualization views' evolution on money, the banking sector in a more open economy to capital flows, and our firm belief that the banking system and the related process of money issuance affect income levels cyclically and over the long term.

How to Cite

Korol, M., Korol, I., & Zayats, O. (2021). MONETARY CIRCULATION AND BANKS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE MAIN ECONOMIC SCHOOLS. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 7(4), 116-122. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2021-7-4-116-122
Article views: 73 | PDF Downloads: 32

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

money, banks, banking system, economic schools, globalization

References

Backe, P. & Wojcik, C. (2008). Credit booms, monetary integration and the new neoclassical synthesis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32, 458–470.

Coats, W. (2019). Modern Monetary Theory: A Critique. Cato Journal, 39(3), 563–576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36009/CJ.39.3.4

Cukierman, А. (2011). The great depression, the global financial crisis and old versus new keynesian thinking: what have we learned and what remains to be learned? DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14409-7_12

Currie, M. & Messori, M. (1998) New Institutional and New Keynesian Economics. In: Arena R., Longhi C. (eds), Markets and Organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-72043-7_8

Davidson, P. (2007). Keynes and Money. In : A Handbook of Alternative Monetary Economics. Edited by Philip Arestis and Malcolm Sawyer. Edward Elgar Publishing, 544 p.

Dimand, R. (2011). The Consequences to the Banks of the Collapse of Money. Available at: http://202.166.170.213:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/1425/Perspectives%20on%20Keynesian%20Economics%20by%20Arie%20Arnon.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y#page=249

Dostaler, G., & Maris, B. (2000). Dr Freud and Mr Keynes onmoney and capitalism. Routledge International Studies in Money and Banking.

Dow, S. C. (2011). Endogenous money: Structuralist. In: P. Arestis and M. Sawyer (eds), A Handbook of Alternative Monetary Economics. Cheltenham. UK: Edward Elgar.

Georg, С.-Р., & Pasche, M. (2008). Endogenous money: on banking behaviour in new and post Keynesian models. Jena Economic Research Papers, 65, 30. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/31770

Goodfriend, M., & McCallum, B. T. (2007). Banking and Interest Rates in Monetary Policy Analysis: A Quantitative Exploration. Journal of Monetary Economics, 54(5), 1480–1507.

Huber, J. (2014). Modern Money Theory and New Currency Theory. Real-world economics review, 66, 38–57.

Levine, R. (2004). Finance and Growth: Theory and Evidence National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper, 10766, 116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w10766

Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.

Palley, T. I. (2019). What's wrong with Modern Money Theory (MMT): a critical primer. FMM Working paper, 44. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/213401

Petkovski, M., & Kjosevski, J. (2014). Does banking sector development promote economic growth? An empirical analysis for selected countries in Central and South Eastern Europe. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 27(1), 55–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2014.947107

Robinson, J. (1952). The Generalization of the General Theory. In: The Rate of Interest and Other Essays. J. Robinson (ed.). London: MacMillan. 164 р. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-16188-1

Smithin, J. (2002). What is money? Introduction. J. Smithin (ed.). London: N.Y. Routledge. Р. 1–15.

Sumner, S., & Horan, P. (2019). How Reliable Is Modern Monetary Theory as a Guide to Policy? Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

The Economist (2020). Can China's economic miracle continue? Finance & Economics. Available at: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2020/09/26/can-chinas-economic-miracle-continue

Uysal, G. (2019). New Version of IS-LM: Neoclassical Monetarism. Economics World, 7(3), 140–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17265/2328-7144/2019.03.004

Werner, R. (2012). Towards a new research programme on ‘banking and the economy’ – Implications of the Quantity Theory of Credit for the prevention and resolution of banking and debt crises. International Review of Financial Analysis, 25, 1–17.

Werner, R. (2012). Towards a new research programme on ‘banking and the economy’ – Implications of the Quantity Theory of Credit for the prevention and resolution of banking and debt crises. International Review of Financial Analysis, 25, 1–17.

Wray, L. (2019). Alternative paths to modern money theory. Available at: http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue89/Wray89.pdf (accessed 01.10.2020).

Zavadska, D. (2018). Determining the role of banks in the financing of innovative development processes of the economy. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(3), 68–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-3-68-73