The way this is done via personal, financial and public support channels also affects the broader economy.
Perotti and Terovitis highlighted the following key findings in their work:
- As a first resort, people seek self-reliance - They invest in assets (such as personal skills or property) that they can control directly, as this ensures a minimum value.
- Unsafe economic circumstances lead to short-sighted financial decisions - When people have poor personal options, they may sell investments at a loss just to ensure they have enough to cover their basic needs. As a result, those with more secure circumstances who can afford to carry risky assets longer earn more over time.
- Banks offer financial safety - Banks act as intermediaries by connecting people seeking financial safety with others able to provide them insurance. Deposits are a reliable source of safety because they are available on demand, avoiding any conflict on risky choices. Savings via a bank help people with poor personal options, improving aggregate investment.
- When private capacity to offer safety is scarce, the safe rate drops - In times of uncertainty, people are willing to pay more for safe investments, leading to a high ‘safety premium’. This is more likely when there is less private capacity to absorb losses to insure depositors.
- Government safety measures have mixed effects - When private capacity to offer safety is low, governments can provide financial security by issuing government bonds, reducing the safety premium at the cost of displacing private investment; or by offering deposit insurance, reducing early liquidation but creating large fiscal risks. The overall effect on investment depends on interim uncertainty and the distribution of personal safe assets.