Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. How costly are sovereign debt crises? In this paper we study output losses during sovereign default and debt renegotiation episodes since 1980. In contrast to previous work, we account for the severity of default and not only for its occurrence. Specifically, we distinguish between "hard" and "soft" defaults, using new data on debtor payment and negotiation behavior and on the size of haircuts towards private external creditors. We show that hard defaults are associated with a much steeper drop in GDP, of up to ten percent, compared to soft defaults, and address concerns of reverse causality and omitted variable bias. The results question the standard assumption that defaults trigger fixed and lump-sum costs. Instead, our findings are consistent with models assuming proportional output costs of default. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor mayJEL-Codes: F340, F410, H630, G010.

This paper studies spillovers across sovereign debt markets in the wake of sovereign rating changes. We compile an extensive dataset covering all announcements by the three major agencies (Standard & Poor's, Moody's, Fitch) and daily sovereign bond market movements of up to 73 developed and emerging countries between 1994 and 2011. To cleanly identify the existence of spillover effects, we perform an explicit counterfactual analysis which pits bond market reactions to small revisions in ratings against reactions to all other, more major changes. We also control for the environment in which an announcement is made, such as the anticipation through watchlistings and the interaction of similar rating actions by different agencies. While there is strong evidence of negative spillover effects in response to downgrades, positive spillovers from upgrades are much more limited at best. Furthermore, negative spillover effects are more pronounced for countries within the same region. Strikingly, this cannot be explained by fundamental linkages and similarities between countries.

No abstract

No abstract