The case against capital controls: financial flows, crises, and the flip side of the free-trade argument

Christopher Hartwell

MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany

Abstract: Critics of globalization view the free flow of capital as economically destabilizing and advocate capital controls for four main reasons: controls are intended to guard against volatility, prevent financial contagion, enable infant financial industries to develop in domestic markets, and be an effective measure of last resort that gives governments room in which to breathe while they pursue needed reforms. However, the empirical record does not support the beliefs of proponents of capital controls. Developing countries would be better served by addressing the real causes of financial turmoil. Specifically, countries should fix their unsound banking systems by opening their financial sectors to foreign competition, eliminate government guarantees against bank failures, create independent central banks, and move away from pegged exchange rates and toward floating or fully fixed exchange-rate regimes.

Keywords: capital controls; Asian financial crisis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: F21 F32 O16 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2001-06-14
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40263/1/MPRA_paper_40263.pdf original version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:40263

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Joachim Winter ().