Skip to main content
Log in

International investment rules and capital mobility

Considerations in light of the Asian financial crisis

  • Foreign Investment
  • Published:
Intereconomics

Abstract

In the wake of the Asian financial crisis a number of questions related to free movement of capital are being reconsidered. Is it desirable to have full capital mobility for emerging market economies? Will capital account liberalisation lead to a growing number of financial crises which will threaten the stability of the international financial system?

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. See the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, Consolidated Text and Commentary, OECD, Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs Negotiating Group on the MAI, Paris 1997.

  2. For the EU position on multilateral investment rules in the WTO, see European Commission: A level Playing Field for Direct Investment World Wide. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1995. For the position of the developing countries see A. V. Ganesan: Strategic Options available to Developing countries with regard to a Multilateral Agreement on Investment, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Discussion Paper No. 134, Geneva 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For an overview of the literature on the links between the financial system and economic growth see M. Gertler: Financial Structure and Aggregate Economic Activity: An Overview, in: Journal of Money, Banking and Credit, 20, 1998, Part 2, pp. 559–88. For a discussion of financial development see R. King, R. Levine: Financial Intermediation and Economic Development in: C. Mayer, X. Vives (eds.): Capital Markets and Financial Intermediation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1993.

  4. International Monetary Fund: Balance of Payments Manual, 5th Edition, Washington D.C. 1993.

  5. See E. M. Graham: Foreign Direct Investment in the World Economy, IMF Working Paper, Washington D.C. 1995.

  6. For the theory of multinational banks see H. Grubel: A Theory of Multinational Banking, in: Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Quarterly Review, No. 123, 1977, pp. 349-63. See also J. M. Gray, H. P. Gray: The Multinational Bank: A Financial MNC, in: Journal of Banking and Finance, 5, 1, 1981, pp. 33–63.

  7. see United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD): World Investment Report, Geneva 1997.

  8. See J. Tatom: Portfolio Flows do not Suggest Risk, in: UBS International Finance, Issue 26, 1996, pp. 9–13.

  9. This section draws from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Annual Report, 1997, Ch VI, Financial trends in emerging markets, pp. 97–117, and BIS Annual Report, 1998, Ch. VII, Financial intermediation in the Asian crisis, pp. 117–141.

  10. J. Sachs, S. Radelet, Onset of the East Asian Financial Crisis, Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  11. B. Eichengreen, R. Portes: Managing Financial Crises in Emerging Markets, Brookings Institution, Washington D.C., April 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  12. This was proposed in the communiqué of G-7 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, following their meeting on February 21, 1988.

  13. V. Galbis: Sequencing of Financial Sector Reforms: A Review, IMF Working Paper, No. 101, Washington D.C., 1994, See also R. I. McKinnon: The Order of Economic Liberalization, 2nd ed., Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore 1992.

  14. J. Bhagwati: The Capital Myth, in: Foreign Affairs, April-May 1998.

  15. D. Rodrik: Who Needs Capital Account Convertibility? in: Should the IMF Pursue Capital Account Convertibility?, Essays in International Finance, No. 207, Princeton University, 1998.

  16. R. Laban, F. Larrain: The Return of Private Capital to Chile in the 1990s: Causes, Effects and Policy Reactions John F. Kennedy School of Government, Faculty Research Working Paper R98-02, Harvard University, January 1998.

  17. See Ch. 3, Experience with Capital Account Liberalization in Industrial Countries in: Capital Account Convertibility Review of Experience and Implications for IMF Policies, Occasional Paper 131, International Monetary Fund, Washington D.C., October 1995.

  18. See The European Financial Common market, Periodical 4/1989, European Documentation, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1989.

  19. See C.-J. Lindgren, G. Garcia, M. I. Saal. Bank Soundness and Macroeconomic Policy, International Monetary Fund, Washington D.C. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. See Bank For international Settlements: Profile of an International Organisation, June 1998, http://www.bis.org.

  21. For a critical evaluation of the Basle Accord see M. J. B. Hall: The BIS Capital Adequacy “Rules”: A Critique, in: Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Quarterly Review, No. 169, June 1989, pp. 207–229.

  22. See Ch. IV: Experience with Capital Account Liberalization in Developing Countries, in: Capital Account Convertibility Review of Experience and Implications for IMF policies, op. cit.

  23. For an analysis of the first Agreement see P. Sorsa: The GATS Agreement on Financial Services—A Modest Start to Multilateral Liberalisation, IMF Working Paper WP/97/55, Washington D.C. 1997. See also the study published by the WTO entitled Opening Markets in Financial Services and the Role of the GATS, Geneva 1997.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gavin, B., Haegeli, J. International investment rules and capital mobility. Intereconomics 34, 27–38 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02928969

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02928969

Keywords

Navigation