Why should each country have its own exclusive currency? Eric Helleiner offers a fascinating and unique perspective on this question in his accessible history of the origins of national money. Our contemporary understandings of national currency are, Helleiner shows, surprisingly recent. Based on standardized technologies of production and extraction, territorially exclusive national currencies emerged for the first time only during the nineteenth century. This major change involved a narrow definition of legal tender and the exclusion of tokens of value issued outside the national territory. "Territorial currencies" rapidly became bound up with the rise of national markets, and money reflected basic questions of national identity and self-presentation: In what way should money be managed to serve national goals? Whose pictures should go on the banknotes? Helleiner draws out the potent implications of this largely unknown history for today's context. Territorial currencies face challenges from many monetary innovations—the creation of the euro, dollarization, the spread of local currencies, and the prospect of privately issued electronic currencies. While these challenges are dramatic, the author argues that their significance should not be overstated. Even in their short historical life, territorial currencies have never been as dominant as conventional wisdom suggests. The future of this kind of currency, Helleiner contends, depends on political struggles across the globe, struggles that echo those at the birth of national money.

This is economics (see, monetary economics) and corresponding economic history and focuses on what the book title suggests: money and market developing from their very beginnings. First, some crucial (,,hot) historical points are here identifyed: the market picture before money entering history, then getting national and international through what was the ,,gold standard; money out of its metal ,,base or ,,cover; money as national and international after gold. Second, a substantial debate reaches another level of developments: ,,representative, versus ,,fiat money (?). Third, how about international money, as different from national (scale) money in context?

In the age of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, a new international trade in industrial and human waste, the depletion of the ozone layer, and the greenhouse effect, the importance of international cooperation is supremely evident. In the economic arena, such problems include speculative instability in financial and primary commodities markets, competition in tax regimes, and the greatly enhanced scope for tax evasion. Can Nations Agree? examines the crucial issues surrounding international cooperation-- conditions that foster cooperation toward common goals; ways to handle the friction arising from conflicting goals; and the structures that best promote cooperation. Although nations recognize the value of cooperation in an independent world, a variety of conditions inhibit the process. In recent decades the number of independent nations has risen rapidly, and so has the variety of decisionmakers and national interests to be reconciled. At the same time, the economic power of the United States has declined in relation to other successful capitalist countries. In the chapters on the 1978 Bonn economic summit, German macroeconomic policy, international cooperation on public health issues, and hegemony and stability, the scholars contributing to this volume analyze the history and process of international cooperation to offer fresh insight for future efforts.

For contents and other editions, see Title Catalog.

This collection of essays aims to form a focused, original and constructive approach to examining the question of convergence and divergence in Europe.

The papers presented here were first given at the International Conference of Economists at the University of Zagreb in Yugoslavia. The book contains a rare selection of divergent theoretical and practical views on the acute problem of international debt and its repercussions on world economic growth at large and the developing countries in particular.

Forrest Capie is an eminent economic historian who has published extensively on a wide range of topics, with an emphasis on banking and monetary history, particularly in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but also in other areas such as tariffs and the interwar economy. He is a former editor of the Economic History Review, one of the leading academic journals in this discipline. Under the steely editorship of Geoffrey Wood, this book brings together a stellar line of of contributors - including Charles Goodhart, Harold James, Michael Bordo, Barry Eichengreen, Charles Calomiris, and Anna Schwartz. The book analyzes many of the mainstream themes in economic and financial history - monetary policy, international financial regulation, economic performance, exchange rate systems, international trade, banking and financial markets - where historical perspectives are considered important. The current wave of globalisation has stimulated interest in many of these areas as ‘lessons of history’ are sought. These themes also reflect the breadth of Capie’s work in terms of time periods and topics.

The financial collapse of 2007–8 has questioned our assumptions about the underlying basis for stability in the financial system, and Anthony Hotson here offers an important reassessment of the development of London's money and credit markets since the great currency crisis of 1695. He shows how this period has seen a series of intermittent financial crises interspersed with successive attempts to find ways and means of stabilizing the system. He emphasises, in particular, the importance of various principles of sound banking practice, developed in the late nineteenth century, that helped to stabilize London's money and credit markets. He shows how these principles informed a range of market practices that limited aggressive forms of funding, and discouraged speculative lending. A tendency to downplay the importance of these regulatory practices encouraged a degree of complacency about their removal, with consequences right through to the present day.