Libor 1986–2021: the making and unmaking of ‘the world's most important price’
Libor 1986–2021: the making and unmaking of ‘the world's most important price’
复制标题
Libor 1986-2021：“世界上最重要价格”的形成与毁灭
DOI：
10.1080/1600910x.2018.1430599
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Lindo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alexis Stenfors;D. Lindo
摘要直到2008年前后，以及随后系统性操纵的揭露，伦敦银行间同业拆借利率（LIBOR）的完整性和“真实性”很少受到质疑。学者们将LIBOR和欧洲美元市场视为同义词。中央银行家执行货币政策时，就好像LIBOR是货币市场利率的客观反映。公司和家庭进入LIBOR指数的金融合同，好像货币市场是基础基准。本文探讨了LIBOR如何以及为什么能够在这么长时间内保持其作为竞争性货币市场术语的地位。通过采用一个从政治经济学和社会学两个方面汲取见解的理论框架，并将其应用于LIBOR指数化的衍生品市场，显示了基准的外观如何背叛其基本性质。这一过程有利于市场中的某些行为者：银行。然而，重要的是，它也揭示了LIBOR如何成为并保持如此重要的基准，它如何被视为一个“客观事实”，以及为什么制定的监管不足以维持其未来的使用。
ABSTRACT Up until around 2008 and the subsequent revelation of systematic manipulation, the integrity and ‘facticity’ of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) were rarely questioned. Academics treated LIBOR and the Eurodollar market as if they were synonyms. Central bankers conducted monetary policy as if the LIBOR was an objective reflection of the money market rate. Corporates and households entered into LIBOR-indexed financial contacts as if a money market was the underlying benchmark. This paper investigates how and why LIBOR managed to maintain its status as a term for the competitive money market colloquially, professionally and in the economic literature for so long. By adopting a theoretical framework drawing insights from both political economy and sociology, and applying it to the LIBOR-indexed derivatives market, it is shown how the benchmark's appearance betrays its fundamental nature. This process benefits certain actors within the market: the banks. Importantly, however, it also reveals how LIBOR became, and remained, such an important benchmark, how it came to be perceived as an ‘objective fact’, and why the regulation that came into place was insufficient to sustain its future use.