1As Member States struggle to retain the investment grades necessary to allow them to finance their governmental operations at a reasonable cost, credit rating agencies (CRAs) have been blamed for exacerbating a procyclical bias which only makes this task more difficult. How CRAs contribute to the constitution of the politics of limits underpinning the European sovereign debt crisis is at the core of this article. As a socio-technical device of control, sovereign ratings are an 'illocutionary' statement about budgetary health, which promotes an artificial fiscal normality. Subsequently, these austere politics of creditworthiness have 'perlocutionary' effects, which seek to censure political discretion through normalizing risk techniques aligned with the self-systemic, and thereby selfregulating, logic of Anglo-American versions of capitalism. The ensuing antagonistic relationship between the programmatic/expertise and operational/politics dimensions of fiscal governance leaves Europe vulnerable to crisis and the renegotiation of how the 'political' is established in the economy.New regulatory technical standards (RTS) can exacerbated the performative effects on CRAs, investors and Member States.

No abstract

Analysing the European Union's regulatory response in the wake of the credit and sovereign debt crises, this paper argues how its adoption of risk management as the core strategy for governing the credit ratings space may undermine European efforts to rebalance the growing asymmetry between private expertise and public democracy. While centralised oversight, enhanced transparency and restorative, technical intervention seem like sound regulatory initiatives, I problematise the methodologies, models and assumptions of sovereign ratings to show how the new ratings framework may actually impede the ability of the technocratic European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to redress the most egregious deficiencies of ratings. Drawing on the performativity of market relations, the paper argues how ESMA's supervisory conflicts undermine the EU's capacity to perform an alternative political economy of limits. Neither is it democratically sanctioned to interfere in the analytical substance of ratings nor should it distort the social facticity of creditworthiness by relying primarily on quantitative risk analysis, ESMA will be forced to either repoliticise the ratings process or promote the status quo, which diminishes fiscal sovereignty.

This document is the author's final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.

The global political economy is in flux as a series of cumulative crises impacts its organization and governance. The IPE series has tracked its development in both analysis and structure over the last three decades. It has always had a concentration on the global South. Now the South increasingly challenges the North as the centre of development, also reflected in a growing number of submissions and publications on indebted Eurozone economies in Southern Europe.An indispensable resource for scholars and researchers, the series examines a variety of capitalisms and connections by focusing on emerging economies, companies and sectors, debates and policies. It informs diverse policy communities as the established trans-Atlantic North declines and 'the rest', especially the BRICS, rise.

No abstract

No abstract

not available   Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v2i1.162