拉丁美洲持续违约的解释:1822-1914年伦敦债务人与债权人关系分析

IF 0.4 Q3 HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Juan Huitzilihuitl Flores Zendejas
{"title":"拉丁美洲持续违约的解释:1822-1914年伦敦债务人与债权人关系分析","authors":"Juan Huitzilihuitl Flores Zendejas","doi":"10.1017/S0968565020000190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the reasons why most Latin American governments frequently defaulted on their debts during the nineteenth century. Contrary to previous works, which focused on domestic factors, I argue that supply-side factors were equally important. The regulatory framework at the London Stock Exchange prevented defaulting governments from having access to the capital market. Therefore, the implicit incentive for underwriting banks and governments was to accelerate negotiations with bondholders, particularly during periods of high liquidity. Frequently, however, settlements were short-lived. In contrast, certain merchant banks opted to delay or refuse a settlement if they judged that the risk of a renewed default was too high. In such cases, even if negotiations were extended, the final agreements were more often respected, allowing governments to improve their repayment record.","PeriodicalId":44063,"journal":{"name":"Financial History Review","volume":"27 1","pages":"319 - 339"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0968565020000190","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explaining Latin America's persistent defaults: an analysis of the debtor–creditor relations in London, 1822–1914\",\"authors\":\"Juan Huitzilihuitl Flores Zendejas\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0968565020000190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyses the reasons why most Latin American governments frequently defaulted on their debts during the nineteenth century. Contrary to previous works, which focused on domestic factors, I argue that supply-side factors were equally important. The regulatory framework at the London Stock Exchange prevented defaulting governments from having access to the capital market. Therefore, the implicit incentive for underwriting banks and governments was to accelerate negotiations with bondholders, particularly during periods of high liquidity. Frequently, however, settlements were short-lived. In contrast, certain merchant banks opted to delay or refuse a settlement if they judged that the risk of a renewed default was too high. In such cases, even if negotiations were extended, the final agreements were more often respected, allowing governments to improve their repayment record.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44063,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Financial History Review\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"319 - 339\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0968565020000190\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Financial History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0968565020000190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0968565020000190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文分析了十九世纪大多数拉美国家政府经常拖欠债务的原因。与以往关注国内因素的著作相反,我认为供给方面的因素同样重要。伦敦证券交易所(London Stock Exchange)的监管框架阻止了违约政府进入资本市场。因此,承销银行和政府的隐含动机是加快与债券持有人的谈判,尤其是在流动性高的时期。然而,定居往往是短命的。相比之下,如果某些商业银行认为再次违约的风险太高,它们会选择推迟或拒绝和解。在这种情况下,即使谈判延长,最终协议也往往得到尊重,允许政府改善其还款记录。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Explaining Latin America's persistent defaults: an analysis of the debtor–creditor relations in London, 1822–1914
This article analyses the reasons why most Latin American governments frequently defaulted on their debts during the nineteenth century. Contrary to previous works, which focused on domestic factors, I argue that supply-side factors were equally important. The regulatory framework at the London Stock Exchange prevented defaulting governments from having access to the capital market. Therefore, the implicit incentive for underwriting banks and governments was to accelerate negotiations with bondholders, particularly during periods of high liquidity. Frequently, however, settlements were short-lived. In contrast, certain merchant banks opted to delay or refuse a settlement if they judged that the risk of a renewed default was too high. In such cases, even if negotiations were extended, the final agreements were more often respected, allowing governments to improve their repayment record.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Financial History Review
Financial History Review HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Financial History Review is the international forum for all scholars with interests in the development of banking, finance, and monetary matters. Its editors deliberately seek to embrace the broadest approach to publishing research findings within this growing historical specialism. Articles address all aspects of financial and monetary history, including technical and theoretical approaches, those derived from cultural and social perspectives and the interrelations between politics and finance. These presentations of current research are complemented by somewhat shorter pieces, specifically conceived as aids to research. Each issue contains a substantial review section, and every complete volume contains an annual bibliography.
×
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