Financially engineering a “self-generative” political economy of creditworthiness: Expertocratic exemption problems for sustainable debt and democracy

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 BUSINESS
Bartholomew Paudyn
{"title":"Financially engineering a “self-generative” political economy of creditworthiness: Expertocratic exemption problems for sustainable debt and democracy","authors":"Bartholomew Paudyn","doi":"10.1177/10245294221105567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Repeated crises have proven credit rating agency (CRA) models/methods erroneous and “business-as-usual” unsustainable. Nevertheless, considerable dubious “default risk” management and technoscientific capitalist expertise remain unchanged. Unpacking sovereign ratings, we appreciate how “debt sustainability analysis” (DSA) distortions underpin expertocratic CRA (default) anomaly. Their neoliberal “politics of limits” performance helps market (shareholder) imperatives trump those of democratic (stakeholder) politics. Given surging inflation and debt (distress) to remedy Covid-19-induced shocks, ratings aid constitute and (re)validate the subjectivities/affinities and organizational conditions advancing a “self-equilibrating,” “self-generative” agencement political economy of creditworthiness (PEC). Antagonizing sustainable budgetary government’s programmatic/expertocratic and operational/democratic asymmetry, econophysics ratings diminish fiscal sovereignty. Universal PEC management through hybrid credit risk/uncertainty qualculation mitigates negative externality contestation shielding CRAs from serious reform. Ratings procyclicality and contagion reinforce this precarious sociotechnical agencement PEC as the status quo.","PeriodicalId":46999,"journal":{"name":"Competition & Change","volume":"27 1","pages":"354 - 379"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition & Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294221105567","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Repeated crises have proven credit rating agency (CRA) models/methods erroneous and “business-as-usual” unsustainable. Nevertheless, considerable dubious “default risk” management and technoscientific capitalist expertise remain unchanged. Unpacking sovereign ratings, we appreciate how “debt sustainability analysis” (DSA) distortions underpin expertocratic CRA (default) anomaly. Their neoliberal “politics of limits” performance helps market (shareholder) imperatives trump those of democratic (stakeholder) politics. Given surging inflation and debt (distress) to remedy Covid-19-induced shocks, ratings aid constitute and (re)validate the subjectivities/affinities and organizational conditions advancing a “self-equilibrating,” “self-generative” agencement political economy of creditworthiness (PEC). Antagonizing sustainable budgetary government’s programmatic/expertocratic and operational/democratic asymmetry, econophysics ratings diminish fiscal sovereignty. Universal PEC management through hybrid credit risk/uncertainty qualculation mitigates negative externality contestation shielding CRAs from serious reform. Ratings procyclicality and contagion reinforce this precarious sociotechnical agencement PEC as the status quo.
金融工程“自我生成”的信誉政治经济:可持续债务和民主的专家豁免问题
多次危机已经证明,信用评级机构(CRA)的模型/方法是错误的,“一切照旧”是不可持续的。然而,相当多可疑的“违约风险”管理和技术资本主义专业知识仍未改变。在分析主权评级时,我们认识到“债务可持续性分析”(DSA)的扭曲是如何支撑专家主导的CRA(违约)异常的。他们的新自由主义“限制政治”表现有助于市场(股东)的要求胜过民主(利益相关者)政治的要求。考虑到为应对新冠肺炎引发的冲击而出现的通胀飙升和债务(困境),评级援助构成并(重新)验证了主观性/亲和性和组织条件,从而推动了“自我平衡”、“自我生成”的信用政治经济学(PEC)。对抗可持续预算政府的计划性/专家主义和操作性/民主的不对称,经济物理学评级削弱了财政主权。通过混合信用风险/不确定性计算的通用PEC管理减轻了负面外部性争议,从而使评级机构免受严重改革的影响。评级的顺周期性和传染性强化了这种不稳定的社会技术协定(PEC)的现状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
37
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信