Digital currencies: a problem of trust

V. Koziuk
{"title":"Digital currencies: a problem of trust","authors":"V. Koziuk","doi":"10.15407/etet2021.02.093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rising cryptocurrencies have revived discussion about the prospects of monetary order and the central bank’s role in it. Functionality is in the core of the competition between the forms of money and the payment landscape could be fractionalized affecting further decline in the efficiency of monetary policy. Central bank digital currency (CBDC) is looked by monetary authorities as a way to respond to technological challenge and fulfill the gap of the market failure related to some imperfections of privately issued digital money. The success of each money form is dependent on the trust as a collective experience. The paper raises the question if the central banks are more credible than private digital money when probable change in the age structure matters for the spread of fintech. Based on empirical analysis, it is found that economic agents differentiate digital money of central banks from those of private issuers. Private cryptocurrencies are considered more reliable when inflationary experience is stronger, while central banks’ independence level and financial stability are not factors of higher trust to CBDC. Also, a country’s institutional features do not indicate that successful central banks can use the “the umbrella” of trust to their own cryptocurrencies while the factors of technological advance fail to show a clear significance. Social capital better contributes to the trust to private digital money. At the same time, the age structure is the strong factor due to which digital currencies are more reliable in younger societies. It is concluded that in the case then trust in cryptocurrencies is not grounded on institutional factors that historically contributed to stability of the monetary order, preconditions for the latter’s higher vulnerability are likely to rise. With the growing role of age structure as a factor of higher trust to digital money, the quality of social interactions will become a very important institutional precondition for the stability of monetary order.","PeriodicalId":209799,"journal":{"name":"Ekonomìčna teorìâ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ekonomìčna teorìâ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15407/etet2021.02.093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The rising cryptocurrencies have revived discussion about the prospects of monetary order and the central bank’s role in it. Functionality is in the core of the competition between the forms of money and the payment landscape could be fractionalized affecting further decline in the efficiency of monetary policy. Central bank digital currency (CBDC) is looked by monetary authorities as a way to respond to technological challenge and fulfill the gap of the market failure related to some imperfections of privately issued digital money. The success of each money form is dependent on the trust as a collective experience. The paper raises the question if the central banks are more credible than private digital money when probable change in the age structure matters for the spread of fintech. Based on empirical analysis, it is found that economic agents differentiate digital money of central banks from those of private issuers. Private cryptocurrencies are considered more reliable when inflationary experience is stronger, while central banks’ independence level and financial stability are not factors of higher trust to CBDC. Also, a country’s institutional features do not indicate that successful central banks can use the “the umbrella” of trust to their own cryptocurrencies while the factors of technological advance fail to show a clear significance. Social capital better contributes to the trust to private digital money. At the same time, the age structure is the strong factor due to which digital currencies are more reliable in younger societies. It is concluded that in the case then trust in cryptocurrencies is not grounded on institutional factors that historically contributed to stability of the monetary order, preconditions for the latter’s higher vulnerability are likely to rise. With the growing role of age structure as a factor of higher trust to digital money, the quality of social interactions will become a very important institutional precondition for the stability of monetary order.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字货币:信任问题
不断上涨的加密货币重新引发了关于货币秩序前景和央行在其中作用的讨论。功能是货币形式之间竞争的核心,支付格局可能被分割,影响货币政策效率的进一步下降。中央银行数字货币(CBDC)被货币当局视为应对技术挑战和填补私人发行数字货币的一些不完善所导致的市场失灵空白的一种方式。每一种货币形式的成功都依赖于信托作为一种集体经验。这篇论文提出了这样一个问题:当年龄结构的可能变化对金融科技的传播至关重要时,央行是否比私人数字货币更可信?实证分析发现,经济主体将央行发行的数字货币与私人发行的数字货币区分开来。当通胀经历更强时,私人加密货币被认为更可靠,而央行的独立性水平和金融稳定性并不是对CBDC更高信任的因素。此外,一个国家的制度特征并不表明,成功的中央银行可以使用信任的“保护伞”来保护自己的加密货币,而技术进步的因素未能显示出明确的重要性。社会资本对私人数字货币的信任有更好的贡献。与此同时,年龄结构是数字货币在年轻社会中更可靠的重要因素。结论是,在这种情况下,对加密货币的信任并不基于历史上有助于货币秩序稳定的制度因素,后者更高脆弱性的先决条件可能会上升。随着年龄结构对数字货币的信任度越来越高,社会互动质量将成为货币秩序稳定的重要制度前提。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Economic pragmatism: political-economy essence, antipodes and imitation A classical ancient polis: the power-holding group and the features of exchange and appropriation Oligopoly control and unification of quantitative indexes to control different types of monopoly Strategic planning as a way of public administration Value-based work motivation: the East Asian experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1