Blog post

A banking union for growth

Publishing date
12 June 2012

A new concept has recently emerged in the policy discussion as a solution to the euro area’s woes: a banking union. It appears that discussions on a banking union will now be on top of the agenda of the next European summit. So are politicians now talking about how to rescue banks instead of how to generate growth and increase jobs as was initially planned? In fact, there is no contradiction here. One of the important reasons for low growth in Europe is the uncertainly about the euro’s future and that is intrinsically linked with the idea of a banking union. Here is why.

Let us start with the idea of a banking union. The rationale for a banking union is rather straightforward. EMU was constructed on the basis of two pillars: a monetary and a fiscal one. It has no financial component. Recent developments have exposed further weaknesses. First, the previously integrated euro-area financial market has entered a process of fragmentation. Banks were European in quiet times, but have become national in crisis times as they depend on national governments for being bailed out, if needed. Furthermore, they have been encouraged by national authorities to cut cross-border lending.

The absence of a banking union has thus created huge uncertainty and even a break-up of the euro area is now discussed. This uncertainty has severe negative consequences on growth, jobs and investment. In fact, international investors are increasingly starting to drop their European investments. Domestic investors reduce their investment in the fear of a fragmentation of the euro area and certainly reduce exposure to the South of Europe where investment is most urgently needed. Creating a European banking union is therefore one of the key factors for a successful overcoming of the crisis and for generating growth. So what would a banking union consist of and what would it imply?

A banking union would assign to the European level the responsibility for deposit insurance, bank supervision, and crisis resolution. This is not an easy move. Deposit insurances have been put in place to prevent a bank run on banks. By protecting depositors, depositors will keep their savings at the bank. This increases the stability of the banking system and thereby helps promoting growth. For a deposit insurance to be effective there needs to be a commitment by the governments to stand behind it. In Europe, this would imply a joint commitment by European governments to step in and protect depositors throughout the euro area. This is a major political step to take as it could result in large payments from some countries to others.

Second, a banking union would centralize the supervision of banks throughout Europe. This is the necessary counterpart to the creation of a common deposit insurance as well as to a common resolution system. In fact, mutualising risk also means that one has to centralise control over risk as otherwise every country would have a large incentive to supervise banks only lightly and impose the losses on tax payers of other countries. A creation of a common supervisory authority is thus needed.

Third, a common resolution authority needs to be created. When a bank becomes insolvent, an orderly process to manage this insolvency is needed. Ideally, this process should minimize the costs to the tax payer while at the same time ensuring the stability of the financial system and preserving the most important functions exercised by the bank. This requires strong political authority and technical expertise. The cross-border nature of banking in Europe also implies that a European authority can exercise this function in the most efficient way.

The path towards a common European banking union is certainly difficult. At the same time, it has become clear that a more centralized approach to banking is necessary if Europe wants to recover stability and resilience. In turn, this stability is one of the most important factors needed for more growth in Europe. Focussing on the banking problems is certainly the best thing European leaders can do for growth and jobs at their next summit.

About the authors

  • Guntram B. Wolff

    Guntram Wolff is a Senior fellow at Bruegel. He is also a Professor of Economics at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB). 

    From 2022-2024, he was the Director and CEO of the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and from 2013-22 the director of Bruegel. Over his career, he has contributed to research on European political economy, climate policy, geoeconomics, macroeconomics and foreign affairs. His work was published in academic journals such as Nature, Science, Research Policy, Energy Policy, Climate Policy, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Banking and Finance. His co-authored book “The macroeconomics of decarbonization” is published in Cambridge University Press.

    An experienced public adviser, he has been testifying twice a year since 2013 to the informal European finance ministers’ and central bank governors’ ECOFIN Council meeting on a large variety of topics. He also regularly testifies to the European Parliament, the Bundestag and speaks to corporate boards. In 2020,  ranked him one of the 28 most influential “power players” in Europe. From 2012-16, he was a member of the French prime minister’s Conseil d’Analyse Economique. In 2018, then IMF managing director Christine Lagarde appointed him to the external advisory group on surveillance to review the Fund’s priorities. In 2021, he was appointed member and co-director to the G20 High level independent panel on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response under the co-chairs Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Lawrence H. Summers and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. From 2013-22, he was an advisor to the Mastercard Centre for Inclusive Growth. He is a member of the Bulgarian Council of Economic Analysis, the European Council on Foreign Affairs and advisory board of Elcano. He is also a fellow at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

    Guntram joined Bruegel from the European Commission, where he worked on the macroeconomics of the euro area and the reform of euro area governance. Prior to joining the Commission, he worked in the research department at the Bundesbank, which he joined after completing his PhD in economics at the University of Bonn. He also worked as an external adviser to the International Monetary Fund. He is fluent in German, English, and French. His work is regularly published and cited in leading media. 

Related content