پیدایش بحران مالی جهانی در سال 2008 و چالش برای پارادایم نئوکلاسیک مالی

In the first step, this paper briefly discusses the macroeconomic background of the 2008 financial crisis. Next, we take a wider approach and we look at systemic changes that global economics, and financial markets in particular, had undergone. We wonder if these transformations, and their effects so dramatically demonstrated in 2008, give grounds to modify the theoretical background of finance. The neoclassical paradigm might be seen as an idealized normative benchmark. On the other hand, behavioral approach helps explain deviations from this benchmark, however itself it lacks the normative character. We conclude that in contemporary circumstances an interdisciplinary approach is needed in the search for an adequate theory, as the financial world is getting more and more complex and dynamic.

2008 abounded with financial markets events on the scale and scope often compared to the Great Depression that happened in the 1930s. Global problems of the financial sector, loss of liquidity by the recently still very credible institutions, drastic devaluation of assets and a significant growth in the volatility of the stock and commodity markets — all these factors give rise to the questions that are very often difficult to answer on the grounds of the neoclassical financial theory. In the first step, this paper briefly discusses the macroeconomic background of the recent market turbulences. It discusses also market developments and specific financial instruments that greatly contributed to the scale of the crisis. Later, a wider approach is taken. We look at systemic changes that global economics, and financial markets in particular, had undergone. We wonder if the these transformations and their effects so dramatically demonstrated in 2008, give grounds to modify the theoretical background of finance and to search for a new paradigm that could better describe processes occurring in the global financial market.

In contemporary circumstances an interdisciplinary approach is needed in the search for an adequate theory. The neoclassical paradigm might be seen as an idealized normative benchmark. On the other hand, behavioral finance help explain deviations from this benchmark, showing how psychological biases may cause irrational behavior of investors. Behavioral approach is a valuable supplement when trying to understand financial markets. However, it would be of a greater usefulness if it allowed not only explain events ex post, but also if it delivered some normative tools for modeling the market and predicting behavior of investors ex ante. Perhaps the theory of finance should be also enriched by other disciplines of science than only psychology, for example neuropsychology, sociology, economic cybernetics, geopolitics. There is a lot to be done. Thanks to interdisciplinary cooperation of scientist we shall learn more about processes undergoing in global financial markets, and hopefully we shall be able to build a new coherent theory of finance, reflecting the complexity of contemporary state of affairs.