Europe between financial repression and regulatory capture. Bruegel Working Paper 2014/08, July 2014

From the Introduction. In the long shadow of the euro-area crisis, the relationship between governments and their banks has been brought to the the centre of the policy debate in Europe by the implementation of regulatory reforms, the risks associated with financial fragmentation, and the fight to sustain the flow of credit to governments and corporates. The attempt to interpret the patterns of pressure and influence running between governments and their financial system has led commentators to rediscover and give new life to concepts originating from academic debates of the 1970s such as “regulatory capture” and “financial repression”. Government agencies have been frequently described as being at the mercy of the financial sector, often allowing financial interests to hijack political, regulatory and supervisory processes in order to favouring their own private interests over the public good1. An opposite view has instead pointed the finger at governments, which have often been portrayed as subverting markets and abusing the financial system to their benefit, either in order to secure better financing conditions to overcome their own financial difficulties, or with the objective of directing credit to certain sectors of the economy, “repressing” the free functioning of financial markets and potentially the private interests of some of its participants2

West African Migrants in Spain: Human Factors and Emerging International Policy. ACES Working Paper No. 6, Fall 2008

This paper concerns itself with the recent phenomenon of West Africans leaving the African continent and seeking work in Spain. By the year 2003, a barely noticeable blip on the screen of the age-old phenomenon that is migration became a conspicuous trend. Depending on one's perspective this trend is either a natural flow of people from one region to another, or it is an alarming turn of events that needs immediate global attention. However, when it involves significant loss of life - as does the sea journey of the poorest aspirants - surely all who ponder the migrant question would agree that this qualifies as a crisis. The next question becomes, then, is it best to focus on minimizing the risks or to focus on deterring the would-be migrants at the onset of their journey? This question and its possible answer are further nuanced by whether those determined to leave receive incentives for choosing to stay at home or whether government officials and others who respond to the crisis in both sending and receiving countries practice a forceful type of deterrent that merely halts the process of migration but does not tackle the issue of why the person chose to leave in the first place.