重新设计国际货币体系。智力影响与特别提款权的返还:一个悬而未决的问题

IF 0.1 Q4 ECONOMICS History of Economic Thought and Policy Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.3280/spe2022-002005
Albertina Nania
{"title":"重新设计国际货币体系。智力影响与特别提款权的返还:一个悬而未决的问题","authors":"Albertina Nania","doi":"10.3280/spe2022-002005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper suggests to explore the theoretical and cultural influences on the re-forms made to the International Monetary System since the 1960s, when Triffin's Dilemma \"was apparent for all to see\", as Volcker suggested. Schmelzer argues that \"when Milton Friedman published his article calling for flexible exchange rates in 1953, less than 5 percent of economists around the world shared his view,\" while in the late 1960s, \"about 90 percent of economists did, and they were joined by powerful figures within the government and banking community\". Such con-sensus contributed to strengthening the influence of neoliberal theories not only in the scientific environment of economists, but also and especially in the terrain of the directions taken internationally by political and financial institutions. It is therefore high time to ascertain through an empirical and chronological investigation whether there is any correlation between neoliberal paradigms and the International Monetary Fund's restrictive policy choices regarding the allocations of special drawing rights (the basket currency that was supposed to provide for global liquidity needs), and whether their supporters followed any specific and shared view.","PeriodicalId":40401,"journal":{"name":"History of Economic Thought and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Redesigning the International Monetary System. Intellectual Influences and the Return of the Special Drawing Rights: An Open Issue\",\"authors\":\"Albertina Nania\",\"doi\":\"10.3280/spe2022-002005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper suggests to explore the theoretical and cultural influences on the re-forms made to the International Monetary System since the 1960s, when Triffin's Dilemma \\\"was apparent for all to see\\\", as Volcker suggested. Schmelzer argues that \\\"when Milton Friedman published his article calling for flexible exchange rates in 1953, less than 5 percent of economists around the world shared his view,\\\" while in the late 1960s, \\\"about 90 percent of economists did, and they were joined by powerful figures within the government and banking community\\\". Such con-sensus contributed to strengthening the influence of neoliberal theories not only in the scientific environment of economists, but also and especially in the terrain of the directions taken internationally by political and financial institutions. It is therefore high time to ascertain through an empirical and chronological investigation whether there is any correlation between neoliberal paradigms and the International Monetary Fund's restrictive policy choices regarding the allocations of special drawing rights (the basket currency that was supposed to provide for global liquidity needs), and whether their supporters followed any specific and shared view.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40401,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History of Economic Thought and Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History of Economic Thought and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3280/spe2022-002005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Economic Thought and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/spe2022-002005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文建议探讨自20世纪60年代以来,特里芬的困境“有目共睹”,正如沃尔克所建议的那样,理论和文化对国际货币体系重塑的影响。Schmelzer认为,“当Milton Friedman在1953年发表文章呼吁灵活汇率时,全世界只有不到5%的经济学家赞同他的观点,”而在20世纪60年代末,“大约90%的经济学家赞同,政府和银行界的有权势的人物也加入了他们的行列”。这种概念有助于加强新自由主义理论的影响力,不仅在经济学家的科学环境中,而且在政治和金融机构的国际方向上。因此,现在是时候通过实证和按时间顺序的调查来确定新自由主义范式与国际货币基金组织在特别提款权(本应满足全球流动性需求的篮子货币)分配方面的限制性政策选择之间是否存在任何关联,以及他们的支持者是否遵循任何具体和共同的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Redesigning the International Monetary System. Intellectual Influences and the Return of the Special Drawing Rights: An Open Issue
The paper suggests to explore the theoretical and cultural influences on the re-forms made to the International Monetary System since the 1960s, when Triffin's Dilemma "was apparent for all to see", as Volcker suggested. Schmelzer argues that "when Milton Friedman published his article calling for flexible exchange rates in 1953, less than 5 percent of economists around the world shared his view," while in the late 1960s, "about 90 percent of economists did, and they were joined by powerful figures within the government and banking community". Such con-sensus contributed to strengthening the influence of neoliberal theories not only in the scientific environment of economists, but also and especially in the terrain of the directions taken internationally by political and financial institutions. It is therefore high time to ascertain through an empirical and chronological investigation whether there is any correlation between neoliberal paradigms and the International Monetary Fund's restrictive policy choices regarding the allocations of special drawing rights (the basket currency that was supposed to provide for global liquidity needs), and whether their supporters followed any specific and shared view.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Market Failures and Multi-layered Collective Action. US Economic Debates The Impossibility of a Paretian (Il)liberal. A Historical Review Around Sen's Liberalism (1970-1996) Facing Stagflation in the Seventies in Italy: Fausto Vicarelli's Economic Policy Proposals Louis Brandeis - Founding Father of Modern-Day Antitrust? Book review
×
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