Search

In the summer of 1931, the Austro-German banking crisis spread to Romania and Bulgaria. In the Romanian case, the management of the crisis confronted three types of protagonists – politicians, bankers and central bankers – and positions about the relevant attitude to adopt, in particular to avoid or not the Marmorosch Blank Bank bankruptcy. In Bulgaria, the management of the crisis was more consensual. The intervention of the Bulgarian National Bank allowed the refunding of the more important banks, while a further 34 were declared bankrupt and smaller ones silently disappeared. One of the largest banks in Bulgaria, Credit Bank, was rescued. Archive documents, reports of participants and comments from contemporaries, all emphasize the different conceptions of the function of lender of last resort as held by the different protagonists facing this systemic crisis.

Edgard Milhaud (1873–1964), a professor at the University of Geneva, published a series of texts (from 1932 onwards) promoting the establishment of multilateral international compensation between nation-states, and actively campaigned for this project. His plan centered on a call for a "gold truce" as an alternative to the bilateral clearing agreements that proliferated at the time. The plan drew the attention of several international organizations. It reached the point of arousing the interest of the League of Nations (LON), which decided in 1934 to launch an inquiry (published in 1935) questioning LON members about the project of making clearing agreements multilateral. The Milhaud plan nevertheless fell into oblivion after the Tripartite Agreement (1936) and then the outbreak of WW II. This work aims to situate the Milhaud plan in its intellectual and political context—i.e., the 1930s—analyze its content, and understand its failure. The article also assesses what it had in common with Keynes's plan for an international clearing union developed several years later. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractVladimir Bazarov (1874–1939) tried to construct a monistic theory of cycles and crises on the basis of energy. His analysis of energy principles leads him, in a second step, to put the emphasis on productive forces and labour productivity, whose behaviour plays a determining role in the manifestation of both the cycle and the crisis. Finally, in empirical and statistical terms, the dynamics of labour productivity and of most of the economic series in Bazarov’s model are considered to be the result of a moving stochastic equilibrium (different from the purely mechanic dynamic equilibrium). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the relationship between sustainable concerns (in terms of production and finance) and endogenous growth. First, we start with the pioneering exogenous growth models since they are flexible enough to introduce ecological matters. Indeed, within a Solow (1956) tri-factor production function framework, the introduction of a third input has shed light on the opportunities to converge towards a sustainable growth. By sustainable, we mean all actions aiming at promoting growth and protecting the planet (UN Sustainable Development Goals). To complete this study scope, we introduce the natural resource variables and inclusive finance as endogenous growth models. We present the simplest model called AK and then we extent the analysis to more sophisticated approaches. All models have concluded that the production activity ought to be greener. However, it is possible the production sectors turn greener, but only under the condition the finance is green as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]