The European Central Bank in the International Political Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Central banks lie at the interface between domestic and international political economy. Powerful technocracies tasked with domestic and international macroeconomic governance functions are responsible for monetary policy, sometimes banking supervision, and to contribute to overall financial stability. On occasion, they supervise a variety of non-banking financial services and other functions, such as anti-money laundering. During economic and financial turmoil, central banks can be crisis managers of last resort, or actually crisis managers of first resort. Today, many central banks often enjoy independence from the political authorities. They are important actors in the international monetary and financial systems acting separately from government actors. Central banks contribute to shaping these systems, and are, in turn, affected by them. Major geopolitical developments pose significant challenges to central banks and thus to the scholars studying them. This forum takes stock of current academic and policy debates on the European Central Bank (ECB) and the euro. Individual contributions explore key aspects of the ECB and the euro: the ECB as an overstretched multi-tasking technocracy, struggling with multiple goals; the distributive effects of ECB’s policies; the ECB as a global normative and policy entrepreneur in combating climate change; and the geopolitics of the euro, in particular, the failed promise of the euro as a leading international currency. Together, these contributions tackle fundamental questions about the past, present, and future of the euro and the ECB; offer contending perspectives on the success (or otherwise) of this experiment; and point out what features would warrant further study. We reflect on how these analyses feed into the broader literature on central banks and international organizations in the global political economy more generally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".