【英文】CEPR报告：乌克兰战后宏观经济框架（48页）

英文研究报告 2023年08月03日 09:58 管理员

Reconstruction presents unusual challenges for macroeconomic stability. Specifcally, rapid recovery may need a signifcant expansion of credit to fnance investment (in new housing, infrastructure repair, etc.) and consumption (purchases of cars and other durable goods). Because the war heavily dented (if not wiped out) equity and private wealth, reliance on credit could be heavier than is usual during the expansion phase of typical business cycles. A strong infow of reconstruction aid can result in a stronger hryvnia, thus further amplifying borrowing. In short, there is the danger of a pronounced boom-bust cycle in post-war Ukraine, which would endanger macroeconomic stability and undermine popular support for reforms, EU accession, and more generally market-based economy. It is imperative therefore to utilise macroprudential tools to contain excessive credit growth.

The National Bank of Ukraine should be the core supervisor in this arena. Having a single regulator not only clarifes the responsibilities but also limits regulatory arbitrage and leakages. For example, one may expect a rise of shadow banking and it will be important to have one body to set the regulatory perimeter. Given the high substitution between conventional and shadow banking, macroprudential powers for the whole fnancial sector should be vested with the central bank that already regulates conventional banks. Some responsibilities may be delegated to the central bank directly (as was done with the insurance sector that had poor oversight when supervised by the National Commission for State Regulation in the Field of Financial Services, allowing the development of a host of problems). At the same time, the National Bank of Ukraine should continue to use the Financial Stability Council to coordinate policies and share information.