Essays on International Capital Flows and Macroprudential Oversight

UoM administered thesis: Phd

  • Authors:
  • Nataliia Osina

Abstract

This thesis presents three essays on the main determinants and regulations of international capital flows. The essays contribute to an ongoing significant debate among scholars and practitioners on what determines international capital flows by examining the following issues: Global liquidity, market sentiment and financial stability indices; Global liquidity and capital flow regulations; and Global governance and gross capital flows dynamics. In the first essay, we explore the main determinants of global liquidity, measured using cross-border claims of banks, and establish the link between a variety of financial stability indices and global liquidity. For a sample of 149 countries between 2000 and 2016, we find that Bloomberg Financial Stability Indices are more powerful in explaining global liquidity than FRED Financial Stress Indices and the Euro Area Systemic Stress Composite Indicator (CISS). Moreover, both market sentiment indices, namely the US Conference Board Leading Economic Index (LEI) and the US IBD/TIPP Economic Optimism Index are economically and statistically significant on cross-border bank flows. The research provides useful insights on what market sentiment and financial stability indices are better to employ for financial markets surveillance and as such practice of investment management. We argue that anyone interested in using financial stability indices as indicators of financial conditions and the level of financial stress would benefit from tracking several indices and not just one. The second essay examines the effectiveness of capital controls and macroprudential policies as ways to manage the volume of international capital flows, controlling for other determinants. The findings show that capital controls imposed on inflows generally prevail over controls imposed on outflows in reducing the magnitude of capital flows. The results are consistent with the pecking order theory on capital flows and are connected with the riskiness of different asset classes. For a sample of 112 countries over 2000 and 2016, we find that FX and/or countercyclical reserve (RR_REV) and general countercyclical capital buffer requirements (CTC), reserve requirement ratios (RR) and concentration limits (CONC) are the most effective macroprudential policies for managing countries' exposures to global liquidity fluctuations. Moreover, progress is being made to reduce the systemic risks created by systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) using macroprudential policies. The results reflect recent developments in Basel III regulations and shed light on the effective calibration of capital flow regulations to country-specific circumstances. The final essay examines the link between global governance indicators and patterns of gross capital flows, controlling for other determinants. For a sample of 67 countries between 2000 and 2016, we contribute to explain the existence of the Lucas paradox (1990) on "why doesn't capital flow from rich to poor countries" and the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle (1980). The findings show that institutional quality rather than the effect of diminishing returns of capital is a key explanation for the Lucas paradox. Finally, we provide new evidence on the relationship between the multidimensional nature of financial development and gross capital flows. The findings show the importance and predominance of financial institutions versus financial markets in the dissemination of international capital flows across counties.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Awarding Institution
Supervisors/Advisors
Award date31 Dec 2018