UE572 - Institutions de la monnaie et de la dette

• Campus Condorcet-Centre de colloques
  Centre de colloques, Cours des humanités 93300 Aubervilliers
  Salle 3.07
  1er semestre / hebdomadaire, mardi 10:30-12:30
  du 13 septembre 2022 au 15 novembre 2022
  Nombre de séances : 9

Dernière modification : 31 mai 2022 11:09

Type d'UE

Enseignements fondamentaux de master

Disciplines

Économie, Sociologie

Page web

-

Langues

français

Mots-clés

Économie Socio-économie

Aires culturelles

-

Le programme détaillé n'est pas disponible.

• Séminaires de tronc commun – Sciences économiques et sociales - Institutions, organisations, économie et société – M2/S3
  Suivi et validation – semestriel hebdomadaire = 6 ECTS
  MCC – fiche de lecture

Contacts additionnels

-

Informations pratiques

-

Direction de travaux des étudiants

-

Réception des candidats

-

Pré-requis

-

The institutions of money and debt

From a macroeconomic and accounting perspectives, money and debt are two sides of the same coin. But such an assertion overlooks the institutions and practices that make money and debt separated or fungibles objects. In most cases, the empirical relationships towards money or debt are different.  Money is not always perceived as a debt. And many conditions should be met to transform a debt into an asset deemed as liquid and safe as money. This course opens and deepens an interdisciplinary approach – combining history, sociology, economics and political economy – to study how (public or private) money and (public or private) debt are treated as counterparts or, on the contrary, separated objects. The intellectual project investigates balance-sheet encounters, interactions and frictions of state assets / private liabilities, on the one hand, and private asset / state liabilities on the other hand. Through this perspective, we study important economic and political objects such as public debt, private (over)indebtedness, exchange rate regimes, central bank interventions or banking regulation. In each case, we highlight the nexus of public-private financial and monetary interests and emphasize different historical configurations over time.  A running theme of the course is to question the social and institutional process that make money and debt safe.

1) The first way to delve into such conceptual and empirical program is by tracing a genealogy of organizational boundary-work (its slippering and transforming character), that separates money and debt.  We begin our account in the XIX^tH century, a configuration culminating in the early XX^th century with the gold standard, and that aims at separating through solid institutional barriers private savings, money creation and state borrowing and financing capacities. We contrast this period with two other ideal-typic (or empirico-conceptual) configurations where private money and sovereign debt are clearly intermingled: the first one is labelled public-private money without sovereign debt and refers to interwar and postwar period where a great amount of institutional cooperation between central bank and treasury lead to a low amount of public debt because of an important public-private money creation. The second period is named sovereign debt as money where, through collateral finance, re-developed and naturalized in the 1990s, sovereign debt as safe assets has become the money, the fuel and vehicle of global capital markets.

What interests us in each historical configuration are the institutional battles to identify what sovereign debt is, what money creation is, and how private savings are accounted for separately (according to various degrees) from public debt.

2) The second way to test our research program is to revisit the notion of “trust” as it is concretely experienced inside and around the institutions that are in charge of monetary policies and sovereign debt issuing (Treasury departments – ministries of Finance – and Central Banks). Through the analysis of safe asset and (safe) credit (and money) making, issuing, circulating and controlling we challenge traditional (and vertical) approaches of trust as they have been routinized in French institutionalism school (regulation and convention). break with the dialectical “top-down” versus “bottom up” ways to grasp forms of trust (measuring the people representations, uses and adhesion to money) and we consider heuristic to propose an horizontal approach of trust, through strategic sectors cooperation, struggles and boundary-making. or struggles. Central Banks, Treasuries and Capital markets various organizations have different historical agencies which can be analyzed by socio-economic approaches to public-private balance-sheet encounters.

• Séminaires de tronc commun – Sciences économiques et sociales - Institutions, organisations, économie et société – M2/S3
  Suivi et validation – semestriel hebdomadaire = 6 ECTS
  MCC – fiche de lecture

Contacts additionnels

-

Informations pratiques

-

Direction de travaux des étudiants

-

Réception des candidats

-

Pré-requis

-

• Campus Condorcet-Centre de colloques
  Centre de colloques, Cours des humanités 93300 Aubervilliers
  Salle 3.07
  1er semestre / hebdomadaire, mardi 10:30-12:30
  du 13 septembre 2022 au 15 novembre 2022
  Nombre de séances : 9

The institutions of money and debt

From a macroeconomic and accounting perspectives, money and debt are two sides of the same coin. But such an assertion overlooks the institutions and practices that make money and debt separated or fungibles objects. In most cases, the empirical relationships towards money or debt are different.  Money is not always perceived as a debt. And many conditions should be met to transform a debt into an asset deemed as liquid and safe as money. This course opens and deepens an interdisciplinary approach – combining history, sociology, economics and political economy – to study how (public or private) money and (public or private) debt are treated as counterparts or, on the contrary, separated objects. The intellectual project investigates balance-sheet encounters, interactions and frictions of state assets / private liabilities, on the one hand, and private asset / state liabilities on the other hand. Through this perspective, we study important economic and political objects such as public debt, private (over)indebtedness, exchange rate regimes, central bank interventions or banking regulation. In each case, we highlight the nexus of public-private financial and monetary interests and emphasize different historical configurations over time.  A running theme of the course is to question the social and institutional process that make money and debt safe.

1) The first way to delve into such conceptual and empirical program is by tracing a genealogy of organizational boundary-work (its slippering and transforming character), that separates money and debt.  We begin our account in the XIX^tH century, a configuration culminating in the early XX^th century with the gold standard, and that aims at separating through solid institutional barriers private savings, money creation and state borrowing and financing capacities. We contrast this period with two other ideal-typic (or empirico-conceptual) configurations where private money and sovereign debt are clearly intermingled: the first one is labelled public-private money without sovereign debt and refers to interwar and postwar period where a great amount of institutional cooperation between central bank and treasury lead to a low amount of public debt because of an important public-private money creation. The second period is named sovereign debt as money where, through collateral finance, re-developed and naturalized in the 1990s, sovereign debt as safe assets has become the money, the fuel and vehicle of global capital markets.

What interests us in each historical configuration are the institutional battles to identify what sovereign debt is, what money creation is, and how private savings are accounted for separately (according to various degrees) from public debt.

2) The second way to test our research program is to revisit the notion of “trust” as it is concretely experienced inside and around the institutions that are in charge of monetary policies and sovereign debt issuing (Treasury departments – ministries of Finance – and Central Banks). Through the analysis of safe asset and (safe) credit (and money) making, issuing, circulating and controlling we challenge traditional (and vertical) approaches of trust as they have been routinized in French institutionalism school (regulation and convention). break with the dialectical “top-down” versus “bottom up” ways to grasp forms of trust (measuring the people representations, uses and adhesion to money) and we consider heuristic to propose an horizontal approach of trust, through strategic sectors cooperation, struggles and boundary-making. or struggles. Central Banks, Treasuries and Capital markets various organizations have different historical agencies which can be analyzed by socio-economic approaches to public-private balance-sheet encounters.