The ECB in the adventure of negative rates: The NIRP
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18559/rielf.2020.1.1Keywords:
monetary policyAbstract
The ECB was the first of the G4 central banks to bring its interest rate into negative territory (NIRP, Negative Interest Rate Policy) in June 2014. In the arsenal used by the ECB, it is undoubtedly the most controversial. The aim of the article is to give an overview of this experience. He underlines that the adoption of the NIRP marks, in late 2014 - early 2015, the transition of ECB action to a truly unconventional monetary policy. It is part of the adoption of a new, much more radical, monetary easing strategy, in which the NIRP composes, with forward-looking guidance and an asset purchase program, a triptych intended to fight against triggering a deflationary spiral and bringing inflation close to the target set by the ECB. Its transmission mechanisms and expected effects are then presented along with the main lessons from NIRP previous experiences in Sweden and Denmark. Afterwards, a progress report is proposed, with regard to the objective pursued, where the controversy surrounding its effects is exposed, by questioning in particular its consequences for the situation of the banking system in the euro zone. Finally, the main lessons from this real adventure in unknown lands are learned and the difficulties encountered in leaving the NIRP mentioned.
Downloads
References
ANCB et CITES UNIES. (2014). Etat des lieux de la coopération décentralisée franco-béninoise. Cotonou: Association Nationale des Communes du Bénin (ANCB).
View in Google Scholar
Azfar, O., & Livingston, J. A. (2010). Federalist disciplines or local capture? An empirical analysis of decentralization in Uganda. (Working Papers No. 12). University of Maryland.
View in Google Scholar
Bahl, R. W., & Nath, S. (1986). Public expenditure decentralization in developing countries. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 4, 405-418.
View in Google Scholar
Besson, D. (2002). Investissement des administrations publiques locales : Influence de la décentralisation et du cycle des elections municipales. INSEE Première, 867.
View in Google Scholar
Bergstrom, T. C., & Goodman, R. P. (1973). Private demand for public goods. The American Economic Review, 63(3), 286-296.
View in Google Scholar
Boadway, R., & Shah, A. (2007). Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: Principles and practices. Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
View in Google Scholar
Borcherding, T. E., & Deacon, R. T. (1972). The demand of services of non-federal governments. The American Economic Review, 62(5), 891-901.
View in Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. (1950). Federalism and fiscal equity. The American Economic Review, 40(4), 583-599.
View in Google Scholar
Caldeira, E., & Rota-Graziosi, G. (2014). La décentralisation dans les pays en développement: une revue de la littérature. Revue d’Economie du Développement, 22(4), 5-37.
View in Google Scholar
Centre International d’Etudes pour le Développement Local. (2009). Evaluation coopération décentralisée au Burkina Faso. Rapport de synthèse (vol. 2). Lyon: CIEDEL.
View in Google Scholar
Commission Européenne. (1999). Note d’orientation sur la coopération décentralisée. Bruxelles. Retrieved from www.europa.int
View in Google Scholar
CREFAUR-CEREVE. (1988). Le système de subventions de l’Etat aux communes: une analyse sous l’angle des besoins. Rapport de recherche. Ministère de la recherche et de l’industrie, ronéoté, Université de Rennes-I (CREFAUR) et de Paris-X Nanterre (CEREVE).
View in Google Scholar
De Calan, A, & Coquart, P. (2012). Financer les villes d’Afrique – L’enjeu de l’investissement local. Techniques Financières et Développement, 3(112), 103-126.
View in Google Scholar
Dedrycke, P.-H., & Gilbert, G. (1988). Economie publique locale. Paris: Economica.
View in Google Scholar
DGCID (Direction Générale de la Coopération Internationale et du Développement). (2007). Coopération décentralisée et développement urbain – L’intervention des collectivités territoriales. Paris: Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes.
View in Google Scholar
Dubois, J. L., & Makkaoui, R. (2010). Nouvelles formes de gouvernance dans le domaine de l’eau. Apports et limites de la coopération décentralisée dans les pays en développement. Développement durable et territoires, 1(1), 9-10. Retrieved April 19, 2019 from http://journals.openedition.org/developpementdurable/8413
View in Google Scholar
Egger, P., Koethenbuerger, M., & Smart, M. (2010). Do fiscal transfers alleviate business tax competition? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Public Economics, 94(3-4), 235-246.
View in Google Scholar
Estache, A., & Sinha,S. (1995). Does decentralization increase spending on public infrastructure?. (Policy Research Working Paper No. 1457, 7-17). Washington, DC: World Bank.
View in Google Scholar
Faguet, J. P. (2005). The effects of decentralization on public investment: Evidence and four lessons from Bolivia and Colombia. (Working Papers No. 1). Crisis States Research Centre.
View in Google Scholar
Faguet, J. P. (2004). Does decentralization increase government responsiveness to local needs? Evidence from Bolivia. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 867-893.
View in Google Scholar
Gramlich, E. M. (1977). Intergovernmental grants: A review of the empirical literature. In W. E. Oates (Ed.), The political economy of fiscal federalism (pp. 219-240). Lexington: Health Publishers.
View in Google Scholar
Gramlich, E. M., & Galper, H. (1973). State and local fiscal behavior and federal grant policy. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 15-65.
View in Google Scholar
Groupement Intercommunal des Collines. (2017). Base de données “Inventaire d’équipements financés sous le Fond de Développement Territorial”. Dassa-Zoumé (Bénin).
View in Google Scholar
Guengant, A. (1985). Un modèle macroéconomique de comportement financier des communes en longue période. Revue d’ ’Economie Régionale et Urbaine, 3, 583-616.
View in Google Scholar
Guerlet, A. (2007). Coopération internationale et décentralisée. De nouveaux objectifs. Rapport présenté en séance plénière du Conseil Economique et Social Régional.
View in Google Scholar
Husson, B. (2012). La coopération décentralisée pour le développement, un facteur de crédibilisation des collectivités du sud?. Communication présentée au colloque coopération entre collectivités territoriales du nord et du sud 23 et 24 novembre 2012. Montpellier: MTMsi.
View in Google Scholar
Inman, R. (2008). The flypaper effect. (NBER Working Paper No. 14579).
View in Google Scholar
Institut National de la Statistique et de l’Analyse Economique. (2013). Recensement général de la population et de l’habitat. Cotonou: Direction des Etudes Démographiques (Bénin).
View in Google Scholar
Martinez-Vasquez, J., & Boex, J. (2006). The design of equalization grants: Theory and applications. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
View in Google Scholar
Martinez-Vasquez, J., & Searle, B. (Eds.) (2007). Fiscal equalization: Challenges in the design of intergovernmental transfers. New York: Springer.
View in Google Scholar
Oates, W. E. (1972). Fiscal federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
View in Google Scholar
Peronnet, F. (1980). Les administrations publiques locales dans le modèle “Administrations”. Statistiques et Etudes Financières, 43, 51-60.
View in Google Scholar
Pierre, L. (1963). Taux d’actualisation et taux d’intérêt dans la décision d’investissement de la firme. Revue Économique, 14(6), 891-919.
View in Google Scholar
Prud’homme, R. (1990). Decentralization of expenditures or taxes: The case of France. In R. J. Bennett (Ed.), Decentralization, local governments, and markets. Bennett Oxford: Clarendon Press.
View in Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Poznań University of Economics and Business
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
