Search

A healthy financial system encourages the efficient allocation of capital and risk. The collapse of the house price bubble led to the financial crisis that started in 2007. There is a large empirical literature concerning the relation between asset price bubbles and financial crises. I evaluate the key studies with the respect to the following questions. To what extent do the empirical relations in the existing literature help to identify asset price bubbles ex-ante or ex-post? Do the empirical studies have theoretical foundations? On the basis of that critique, I explain why the application of stochastic optimal control (SOC)/dynamic risk management is a much more effective approach to determine the optimal degree of leverage, the optimum and excessive risk and the probability of a debt crisis. The theoretically founded early warning signals of a crisis are shown to be superior, in general, to those empirical relations in the literature. Moreover the SOC analysis provides a theoretical explanation of the extent that the empirical measures in the literature can be useful.

We formulate a simple theoretical model of a banking industry that we use to identify and construct theory-based measures of systemic bank shocks (SBS). These measures differ from 'banking crisis' (BC) indicators employed in many empirical studies, which are constructed using primarily information on government actions undertaken in response to bank distress. Using both country-level and firm-level samples, we show that SBS indicators consistently predict BC indicators, indicating that BC indicators actually measure lagged policy responses to systemic bank shocks. We then re-examine the impact of macroeconomic factors, bank market structure, deposit insurance, and external shocks on the probability of systemic bank shocks (SBS) and on 'banking crisis' (BC) indicators. We find that the impact of these variables on the likelihood of a policy response to banking distress (as represented by BC indicators) is frequently quite different from that on the likelihood of a systemic bank shock (SBS). We argue that disentangling the effects of systemic bank shocks and policy responses is crucial in understanding the roots of banking crises. We believe that many findings of a large empirical literature need to be re-assessed.

This study concentrates on the signal approach for Kazakhstan. It focuses on the properties of individual indicators prior to observed currency crises. The indicators are used to build composite indicators. An advanced approach uses principal components analysis for the construction of composite indicators. Furthermore, the common signal approach is improved by robust statistical methods. The estimation period reaches from 1997 to 2007. It is shown that most of the composite indicators are able to flag the reported crises at an early stage. In a second step it is checked whether the most recent crisis in 2009 is signalled in advance.

This paper proposes a macro-prudential financial soundness analysis that can be used by most developing and transformation countries with or without crisis experience as well as by developed countries with limited data. The objective is to detect economic and financial sector vulnerability, design appropriate remedial policy responses and undertake preventing actions to address vulnerabilities. The paper also discusses a process for identifying and compiling a set of leading macro-prudential indicators. The system will be tested using a case study referring to Kazakhstan. The main novelty of the study lies in designing composite indicators for the real economy, the banking sector, the overall financial sector and finally the international economic environment of Kazakhstan and in studying the interaction of these composite indicators. An additional innovation is the relatively extensive use of qualitative business survey data to monitor vulnerability or crises; these surveys are data which until now have not been used much in this area of research.

Several developing economies witnessed a large number of systemic financial and currency crises since the 1980s which resulted in severe economic, social, and political problems. The devastating impact of the 1982 and 1994-95 Mexican crises, the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis, the 1998 Russian crisis and the ongoing financial crisis of 2008-2009 suggest that maintaining financial sector stability through reduction of vulnerability is highly crucial. The world is now witnessing an unprecedented systemic financial crisis originated from USA in September 2008 together with a deep worldwide economic recession, particularly in developed countries of Europe and North America. This calls for devising and using on a regular basis an appropriate and effective monitoring and policy formulation system for detecting and addressing vulnerabilities leading to crisis. This paper proposes a macroprudential/financial soundness monitoring, analysis and remedial policy formulation system that can be used by most developing countries with or without crisis experience as well as developed countries with limited data. It also discusses a process for identifying, and compiling a set of leading macroprudential indicators/financial soundness indicators. An empirical illustration using Philippines data is presented.

We discuss metrics of globalization for individual economies as distance measures between fully integrated and trade restricted equilibria in economies initially operating under less than full integration with the global economy. Such metrics can be used to construct country globalization metrics reflecting the distance of economies from full global integration due to trade barriers, barriers to factor flows, barriers to international financial intermediation, solved technological diffusion and other economy specific features yielding less than full integration into the global economy. Many distance metrics present themselves and none are wholly satisfactory since they each behave differently across various displacements from integration. Distance measures can, for instance, be small in goods space but large in price space. We present alternative measures constructed for eight OECD economies and comment in a concluding section on other measures used elsewhere in the literature such as trade / GDP ratios.