Basel Agreements

The Basel Agreements are a set of documents issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) defining methods to calculate capital levels banks should be required to maintain given the risks they accept on the assets they record within their balance sheets. The first agreement was signed in 1988, amended in 1995, rewritten in 2004, and is currently in its third version, known as Basel III.

These agreements were a response to two concerns that emerged in the 1970s. On the one hand, there was increasing discomfort among regulators, government authorities and conservative academic economists with what was seen as a growing problem of moral hazard created by the existence of safety nets for the banking sector. It was believed that safety nets created an environment where banks were stimulated to seek riskier assets because eventual losses would be borne by the authorities rather than by banks themselves. The second concern related to the increasing internationalization of banking activity, which made it difficult for national regulators to monitor properly the risks to which banks under their jurisdiction were exposed.

Classical dichotomy

The classical dichotomy (Patinkin, 1965) refers to the idea that real variables, like output and employment, are independent of monetary variables. In this view, the primary function of money is to act as a lubricant for the efficient production and exchange of commodities. This conception of money rests on "real analysis", which describes an ideal-type economy as a system of barter between rational utility-maximizing individuals (Schumpeter, 1994, p. 277).

In this sense, money is "the unpremeditated resultant, of particular, individual efforts of the members of society, who have little by little worked their way to a determination of the different degrees of saleableness in commodities" (Menger, 1892, p. 242). Hence, money is considered simply as a social technology for the adjudication and determina- tion of "terms of trade", which are inherently specific to individual dyadic economic exchanges (Dodd, 1994, p. 6). It is thus a social "vehicle" that has no efficacy other than to overcome transaction costs concerning the inconveniences of barter, which result from the absence of a double coincidence of wants (Jevons, 1875, p. 3).

Bretton Woods regime

Bretton Woods is a location, period of history, beginning of an era in the twentieth century, birth of an international organization, but, most of all, an international mon- etary system to regulate trade, peg currencies to one standard, and maintain a regime of fixed exchange-rate parity.

In July 1944 at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, 44 nations under official British and American leadership set up economic measures for post-war reconstruction. The US dollar - pegged to gold - was approved as the new monetary standard. Two new insti-tutions were also established with specific tasks: the Stabilization Fund (International Monetary Fund, IMF), a "special organization" (Horsefield, 1969, p. 39), to be a watchdog facilitating and promoting trade through monetary stabilization, and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), with the role of providing member nations with "necessary capital not otherwise available except possibly on too costly terms" (ibid.).

Bank money

Bank money is a liability issued by banks and is sometimes also referred to as credit-money. According to Keynes (1930 [1971], p. 5) bank money "is simply an acknowledgment of private debt, expressed in the money of account, which is used by passing from one hand to another, alternatively with money proper, to settle a transaction".

Chartalists such as Wray (1998) distinguish between state money and bank money. In this view, state money is exogenously created by the state in the form of central bank and treasury liabilities. Bank money is a multiple of state money, recorded on the liabilities side of commercial banks' balance sheets. Chartalists assume that the treasury and the central bank can be considered as one entity from an economic point of view (Wray, 2003, p. 87). Gnos and Rochon (2002, p. 48) disagree, pointing out that "if the Fed is the treasury's bank, then the Fed becomes a central bank vis-à-vis the treasury as well as vis-à-vis private banks, the latter role consisting in converting monies into one another and thus allowing banks to meet their reciprocal liabilities". Additionally, chartalists believe "the [US] government can buy anything that is for sale for dollars merely by issuing dollars" (Wray, 1998, p. ix). But neither central banks nor treasury departments can finally purchase anything by incurring a debt. Instead, every final pur- chase of the treasury or the central bank must be financed with income sooner or later. It is therefore more realistic to suggest that all modern money is (central or commercial) bank money.

Endogenous money

Endogenous money constitutes the cornerstone of post-Keynesian monetary theory, which underlines that the supply of money is determined by the demand for means of payment. An effective presentation of this theory has been proposed by Moore (1988), who differentiates between horizontalists and verticalists. The mainstream theory reflects the verticalist view and states that the money supply function is exogenous, independ- ent from money demand and controlled by the central bank. By contrast, according to endogenous money theory, which reflects the horizontalist view, the supply of money is demand determined, and the central bank can only control the rate of interest, not the quantity of money.

Development banks

Arriving at a concrete definition of development banks is surprisingly tricky, as they have existed in many parts of the world in different forms for centuries. Yet development banks can be broadly defined by their ownership, how they source their funding, and how funding is distributed. Development banks in almost all cases are owned by the State. Unlike private banks, which are created in order to generate profit, development banks are created as macroeconomic policy institutions. This dynamic is not limited to develop- ing countries, or even to central governments. The socialization of finance through devel- opment banks has occurred in many forms under governments of different size, location, historical period, and political leaning.

While the criterion of ownership is a necessary element in defining development banks, it can also create confusion. Many State-owned financial entities that were not created to be development banks have in diverse times and places assumed roles typically assigned to development banks: central banks and State-owned commercial banks have in many instances channelled government funds to specific economic activities gener- ally considered to be part of economic development. Yet the ownership criteria can also make things clear. Institutions that are officially dedicated to economic development, such as the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-African Development Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank, are not owned by the States in whose territory they operate. These banks were originally created in the post-war period to support foreign currency financing for developing countries, yet their institutional operations have since changed considerably.

Free banking

The term "free banking" is generally used to describe a structure of the credit market based on the principle of laissez-faire and characterized by the absence of entry and exit barriers, freedom of monetary issue and the possibility of unrestricted lending and borrowing.

The best-known examples of free banking are those observed in Scotland (from the end of the monopoly of the Scottish Bank to the Peel Act) and in the United States (between 1837 and 1863).

One of the principal supporters of a free banking regime was Mises, whose theories were adopted (and further developed) by the Austrian School. He declared his approval for free banking while recognizing its limitations. In his view, acceptance of a liberalized banking activity did not imply abolition of every form of control over monetary issue: his awareness that banks could issue money without any limit led him to turn his attention to an integral gold monetary system (see Mises, 1949).