2004
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lending of First versus Lending of Last Resort: The Bulgarian Financial Crisis of 1996/1997

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While anecdotal evidence on this hypothesis is available for various countries (Hochreiter and Kowalski, ), the case of Bulgaria throughout the 1990s provides an excellent example for the differences between de‐jure‐rules and de facto behaviour. As described in Berlemann and Nenovsky () the Bulgarian National Bank contributed significantly to excessive inflation and the Bulgarian Financial Crisis of 1996/1997 by continuously monetizing public debt although formally being absolutely independent from the government. As a consequence, adequate measures of central bank independence should be based on informal rules and practices rather than solely on legal codes.…”
Section: Previous Empirical Evidencementioning
confidence: 98%
“…While anecdotal evidence on this hypothesis is available for various countries (Hochreiter and Kowalski, ), the case of Bulgaria throughout the 1990s provides an excellent example for the differences between de‐jure‐rules and de facto behaviour. As described in Berlemann and Nenovsky () the Bulgarian National Bank contributed significantly to excessive inflation and the Bulgarian Financial Crisis of 1996/1997 by continuously monetizing public debt although formally being absolutely independent from the government. As a consequence, adequate measures of central bank independence should be based on informal rules and practices rather than solely on legal codes.…”
Section: Previous Empirical Evidencementioning
confidence: 98%
“…As it is argued in Berlemann and Nenovsky (2003), the main reason for the moral hazard behaviour in Bulgaria was its history as a former communist country with a centrally-planned economy. The severity of Bulgaria's twin crisis was primarily, but not only, due to systematic moral hazard problems in the banking sector.…”
Section: The Bulgarian Crisis Of 1996/1997 and The Bulgarian Currencymentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Nevertheless, the government was not willing to close down these enterprises since this would have had caused excessive unemployment. 6 See Berlemann and Nenovsky (2003). Since most of these credits ex post turned out to be non-collectible, the banking system accumulated losses, too (Koford and 4 In this respect (restoring stability after crisis) some similarity can be down with gold standard restoration in European countries after the First World War (see for more details Bemholz (2003) and Moure, 1998).…”
Section: The Bulgarian Crisis Of 1996/1997 and The Bulgarian Currencymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…More details about the crisis could be found in BNB annual reports(1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000),OECD (1997OECD ( , 1999, Balyozov (1999),Enoch et al (2002) andBerlemann and Nenovsky (2003).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%