Skip to main content

Contagion Risk During the Euro Area Sovereign Debt Crisis: Greece, Convertibility Risk, and the ECB as Lender of Last Resort

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Monetary Policy, Financial Crises, and the Macroeconomy
  • 1262 Accesses

Abstract

Mario Draghi’s famous “Whatever it takes” speech is widely credited as ending the euro area’s sovereign debt crisis by firmly establishing the ECB as the lender of last resort in the euro area and thereby eliminating what is referred to as “convertibility” risk premia. This chapter uses a dynamic conditional correlation model and finds that (non-fundamentally driven) contagion originating from the Greek debt crisis was to some extent responsible for those risk premia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Mario Draghi in his London speech referred to this risk as convertibility risk. It is sometimes also called “redenomination” risk. See De Santis (2015) for an empirical approach to measuring this risk.

  2. 2.

    For a detailed overview of theoretical definitions and empirical measures used in contagion analysis please refer to Pericoli and Sbracia (2003).

  3. 3.

    All data is collected from Thomson Reuters Datastream.

  4. 4.

    A descriptive overview of the data is provided in Table 5 in Appendix 1.

  5. 5.

    Besides other examples, the common monetary policy for the euro area represents a part of the global factor in our raw data. Loosening monetary policy could potentially simultaneously boost every analyzed economy and therefore lead to higher co-movements of assets even in the absence of contagion.

  6. 6.

    For the numerical results of the principal component analysis please see Appendix 2.

  7. 7.

    For numerical results of the DCC estimation please see Appendix 3.

  8. 8.

    Note that there were no downgrades for Germany, thus we do not include any dummy in the regression equation for the Greek-German yield correlations. Appendix 4 shows similar figures for the other countries’ rating development and the scaling of the ratings.

  9. 9.

    For clarity of presentation we show results for the Greek rating dummies in Table 4 only. For results with our control rating dummies please see Appendix 5.

References

  • Afonso, A., Furceri, D., & Gomes, P. (2012). Sovereign credit ratings and financial market linkages: Application to European data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 31, 606–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arezki, R., Candelon, B., & Sy, A. (2011). Sovereign rating news and financial markets spillovers: Evidence from the European debt crisis (IMF Working Papers 11/68).

    Google Scholar 

  • Arghyrou, M. G., & Tsoukalas, J. D. (2011). The Greek debt crisis: Likely causes, mechanics and outcomes. The World Economy, 34, 173–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bindseil, U., & Modery, W. (2011). Ansteckungsgefahren im Eurogebiet und die Rettungsmaßnahmen des Frühling 2010. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, 12, 215–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, B. H., Gibson, M. S., & Loretan, M. (1997). Pitfalls in tests for changes in correlations (International Finance Discussion Paper 597R). Washington, DC: Federal Reserve Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, T. C., Jeon, B. N., & Li, H. (2007). Dynamic correlation analysis of financial contagion: Evidence from Asian markets. Journal of International Money and Finance, 26, 1206–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, C. (2000). Macroeconomic announcement effects on the covariance structure of government bond returns. Journal of Empirical Finance, 7, 479–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsetti, G., Pericoli, M., & Sbracia, M. (2005). Some contagion, some interdependence: More pitfalls in tests of financial contagion. Journal of International Money and Finance, 24, 1177–1199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsetti, G., Pericoli, M., & Sbracia, M. (2011). Correlation analysis of financial contagion. In R. W. Kolb (Ed.), Financial contagion: The viral threat to the wealth of nations (pp. 11–20). New York: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Santis, R. A. (2015). A measure of redenomination risk (ECB Working Paper Series 1785/April 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • Draghi, M. (2012). Verbatim of the remarks made by Mario Draghi. President of the European central bank at the global investment conference in London. Retrieved July 26, 2012, from https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120726.en.html

  • Dungey, M, & Zhumabekova, D. (2001). Testing for contagion using correlations: Some words of caution (Pacific Basin Working Paper PB01-09). San Francisco: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dungey, M., Fry, R. A., Gonzalez-Hermosillo, B., & Martin, V. L. (2003). Unanticipated shocks and systemic influences: The impact of contagion in global equity markets in 1998 (IMF Working Papers 03/84).

    Google Scholar 

  • ECB. (2012). Financial stability review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrmann, M., Fratzscher, M., Güürkaynak, R. S., & Swanson, E. T. (2011). Convergence and anchoring of yield curves in the Euro area. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93, 350–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichengreen, B., Rose, A. K., & Wyplosz, C. (1996). Contagious currency crises (NBER Working Papers 5681).

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. F. (2002). Dynamic conditional correlation: A simple class of multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 20, 339–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. F., & Sheppard, K. (2001). Theoretical and empirical properties of dynamic conditional correlation multivariate GARCH (NBER Working Papers 8554).

    Google Scholar 

  • Favero, C., Pagano, M., & von Thadden, E. L. (2010). How does liquidity affect government bond yields? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45, 107–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, K., & Rigobon, R. (2002). No contagion, only interdependence: Measuring stock market co-movements. Journal of Finance, 57, 2223–2261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Y. (2001). A test for volatility spillover with application to exchange rates. Journal of Econometrics, 103, 183–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaminsky, G. L., Reinhart, C. M., & Vegh, C. A. (2003). The unholy trinity of financial contagion. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17, 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, M. A., & Wadhwani, S. (1990). Transmission of volatility between stock markets. Review of Financial Studies, 3, 5–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loretan, M., & English, W. B. (2000). Evaluating ‘correlation breakdowns’ during periods of market volatility. In International financial markets and the implications for monetary and financial stability (pp 214–231). Basel: Bank for International Settlements.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pericoli, M., & Sbracia, M. (2003). A primer on financial contagion. Journal of Economic Surveys, 17, 571–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Watzka .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1: Descriptive Statistics of Bond Yield Data

Table 5 Descriptive statistics for 10-year benchmark government bond yields between 01.01.2009 and 15.12.2011 for Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Germany

Appendix 2: Principal Component Analysis

The results of the principal components analysis are presented in Table 6. In total, five principal components are calculated. By filtering the first principal component, we adjust the original time series for a factor which explains 90% of the joint variation. This percentage is reasonably high to conclude that the global factor, i.e. the most important joint driver of all original yield series, is approximated and extracted by the first principal component.

Table 6 Principal component analysis

Appendix 3: DCC Coefficients

The estimation results of the DCC model proposed by Engle (2002) and Engle and Sheppard (2001) are provided in Table 7. The modified input variables from Sect. 4.2 are statistically adequate for the DCC model. Based on the single time series, univariate GARCH(1,1) equations are estimated for each country in a first step. Conditional volatilities are assumed to be represented by one lagged news parameter and one lagged decay parameter. In a second step, the GARCH residuals are applied to the multivariate MGARCH(1,1) estimation which models the dynamics of the comovements. The conditional correlations are also modelled with one lagged news parameter and one lagged decay parameter. All parameter estimates of both the univariate and the multivariate estimation are highly significant.

Table 7 DCC parameter estimates: Columns two and three refer to the lagged news parameter (ARCH 1) and the lagged decay parameter (GARCH 1) of the six countries’ univariate GARCH(1,1) estimation and the multivariate MGARCH(1,1) equation

Appendix 4: Country Ratings

Sovereign debt rating downgrades of Ireland, Italy, Portugal or Spain are used as control variables in rating regression (5). An overview of the rating development of those four countries is provided in Fig. 6. No rating development for Germany is displayed as within the observation period there was no downgrade for German sovereign debt which is rated as AAA. The linear rating scale used in Figs. 4 and 6 is described in Table 8.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Irish (upper left subplot), Italian (upper right subplot), Portuguese (lower left subplot) and Spanish (lower right subplot) government debt ratings by the three leading rating agencies. Sources: Moody’s, Fitch and S&P

Table 8 Scaling of rating Figs. 4 and 6

Appendix 5: Results of Ratings Regression Equation (5) for Control Ratings

Table 9 provides estimates for the control rating dummy from rating regression (5). The respective country’s dummy is used as control variable, that is e.g. in the Irish case the Irish rating dummy serves as control variable in the rating regression of the Greek-Irish correlations. No rating dummy is included in the rating regression for the Greek-German correlations as German debt was not downgraded during the observation time span.

Table 9 Rating downgrade regression estimates: Control rating dummy parameter estimates of the respective other country from Eq. (5) are shown for dynamic correlation series of Irish, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish 10-year benchmark government bond yields vis-à-vis Greek 10-year benchmark government bond yields

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Watzka, S. (2017). Contagion Risk During the Euro Area Sovereign Debt Crisis: Greece, Convertibility Risk, and the ECB as Lender of Last Resort. In: Heinemann, F., Klüh, U., Watzka, S. (eds) Monetary Policy, Financial Crises, and the Macroeconomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56261-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics