Abstract

Despite the narrative of a globalized economy, there is no effectively working global payment system. Although there is an infrastructure that allows the transmission of data about global payments, the movement of actual money is executed indirectly, making it an incalculable endeavor. The reason is that money is not simply data, but a complex bundle of rights closely tied to the nation state. In the absence of infrastructure that reliably links payments with guarantees of the nation state, intermediaries that facilitate global payments are forced to create trust in a different way. This is only possible by occupying a highly centralized and therefore powerful position. In this article, we investigate which actors were historically able to hold such a position and how these actors are challenged by digitalization. We suggest that there are three models of payment infrastructure provision. Bank-based systems were dominant until the 1980s, but in the following decades, a second model emerged: the provision of financial infrastructure by global companies. Since the early 2000s, we see a third model: the entrance of tech-driven companies in the payment sector. We conclude that digital technologies will not necessarily solve the problems, but might in fact exacerbate them.

摘要

尽管有全球化经济的说法，但并没有有效运作的全球支付系统。尽管有允许传输有关全球支付的数据的基础设施，但实际货币的流动是间接执行的，这使其成为一项无法估量的工作。原因是金钱不仅仅是数据，而是与民族国家密切相关的复杂权利组合。在缺乏将支付与国家担保可靠地联系起来的基础设施的情况下，促进全球支付的中介机构被迫以不同的方式建立信任。这只有通过占据高度集中且因此强大的位置才能实现。在本文中，我们调查了历史上哪些参与者能够担任这样的职位，以及这些参与者如何受到数字化的挑战。我们建议提供三种支付基础设施提供模式。以银行为基础的系统在 1980 年代之前一直占据主导地位，但在接下来的几十年中，出现了第二种模式：由全球公司提供金融基础设施。自 2000 年代初以来，我们看到了第三种模式：技术驱动型公司进入支付领域。我们的结论是，数字技术不一定能解决问题，实际上可能会加剧这些问题。