Transformation of Public Debt Management (ToPDeM)

除少数发达经济体外，所有经济体的公共债务都处于历史高位。不出所料，对债务负担规模的担忧占据了中心位置。政府究竟如何借贷，这个问题在很大程度上是不存在的。为什么希腊和西班牙的偿债成本在过去十年中有所下降，尽管其公共债务水平（几乎）翻了一番？为什么英国的偿债成本越来越容易受到通货膨胀的影响？日本的债务是如何达到GDP的2.5倍？为什么瑞士法郎的升值会使奥地利的偿债成本上升，而不是荷兰？所有这些问题的答案都指向公共债务管理的关键作用：政府如何借款，而不仅仅是借款多少。债务的预算限制（以借贷成本表示）不仅是债务水平的函数，而且还受到公债规划、发行和管理方式的影响。在英国，债务利息目前达到460亿英镑-几乎相当于国防开支（480亿英镑）的规模。尽管公共债务管理很重要，但却很少受到关注，而且继续笼罩在技术官僚的阴影之下。公共债务管理的《双城之战》性质让债务管理机构的相应改革在很大程度上在公众和学术界的雷达下飞行。本研究全面介绍了这场被忽视的革命。从1970年代开始，发达经济体的债务管理职能已移交给新成立的债务管理办公室，这些办公室现在享有管理主权债务的深远政策独立性。截至2017年，这些机构在经合组织国家管理着超过50万亿美元的资金？我们如何解释公共债务管理在体制安排和新的管理做法方面的转变？这场无声革命的后果和（日益增长的）挑战是什么？建议对债务管理的运作部分进行的研究，旨在揭示公共财政中一个被忽视的角落。该项目对主权债务管理新做法的传播进行理论分析。它结合了来自24个发达国家（1973-2018年）统计分析的严格证据，以及对3个国家（英国，德国和丹麦）的深入比较案例研究，证明了机构结果的差异。在这样做的过程中，这个项目作出了经验，方法和理论的贡献，扩散文献。ToPDeM旨在对公共债务管理的转型进行第一次系统的比较解释，并将提高认识，为民间社会和政策圈内的辩论提供信息。

Public debt looms at historically high levels in all but a few advanced economies. Unsurprisingly, worries about the size of debt burdens take centre stage. What is largely absent, is the question of HOW governments actually borrow. Why have the debt servicing costs of Greece and Spain declined throughout the past decade, despite its public debt levels (almost) doubling? Why have the UK's debt servicing costs become more exposed to inflation? How does Japan carry a debt that is 2,5 times larger than its GDP? And why does a rise in the Swiss Franc make debt servicing more expensive in Austria, but not in the Netherlands? Answers to all of these questions point to the crucial role of public debt management: how governments borrow, and not just how much. The budgetary constraints of debt (expressed in the borrowing costs) are not merely a function of debt levels, but are influenced by the ways in which public debt is planned, issued and managed. In the UK, debt interest currently amounts to £46 billion - almost the size of defence spending (£48bn). In spite of its importance, public debt management has received scant attention and continues to be clouded with technocratic obscurity. The arcane nature of public debt management has allowed consequential reforms in debt management agencies to fly largely under both public and academic radars. This study presents a comprehensive account of this overlooked revolution. Starting in the 1970s, debt management functions in advanced economies have been handed over to newly created debt management offices, which now enjoy far-reaching policy independence to manage sovereign debt. Who are these agencies which as of 2017 manage over 50 trillion US-Dollars across OECD countries? How can we explain the transformation of public debt management, both regarding institutional arrangements and new managerial practices? And what are the consequences and (growing) challenges of this silent revolution? The proposed study on the operational arm of debt management seeks to throw light into an overlooked corner of public finances. This project theorises and analyses the diffusion of new practices in sovereign debt management. It combines rigorous evidence from statistical analyses of 24 developed countries (from 1973-2018) with an in-depth comparative case study of 3 countries demonstrating variation in institutional outcome (the UK, Germany, and Denmark). In so doing, this project makes an empirical, methodological and theoretical contribution to the diffusion literature. ToPDeM aims at producing the first systematic comparative explanation of the transformation of public debt management, and will raise awareness and inform debates across civil society and within policy circles.