The Global Financial Crisis of 2008-09 was a period of severe macroeconomic instability for the United States and the global economy more generally. The crisis was precipitated by the collapse of a number of financial institutions who were deeply involved in the U.S. mortgage market and associated credit markets. Beginning in the Summer of 2007, a number of banks began to report issues with increasing mortgage delinquencies and the problem of not being able to accurately price derivatives contracts which were based on bundles of these U.S. residential mortgages. By the end of 2008, U.S. financial institutions had begun to fail due to their exposure to the housing market, leading to one of the deepest recessions in the history of the United States and to extensive government bailouts of the financial sector.

Subprime and the collapse of the U.S. mortgage market

The early 2000s had seen explosive growth in the U.S. mortgage market, as credit became cheaper due to the Federal Reserve's decision to lower interest rates in the aftermath of the 2001 'Dot Com' Crash, as well as because of the increasing globalization of financial flows which directed funds into U.S. financial markets. Lower mortgage rates gave incentive to financial institutions to begin lending to riskier borrowers, using so-called 'subprime' loans. These were loans to borrowers with poor credit scores, who would not have met the requirements for a conventional mortgage loan. In order to hedge against the risk of these riskier loans, financial institutions began to use complex financial instruments known as derivatives, which bundled mortgage loans together and allowed the risk of default to be sold on to willing investors. This practice was supposed to remove the risk from these loans, by effectively allowing credit institutions to buy insurance against delinquencies. Due to the fraudulent practices of credit ratings agencies, however, the price of these contacts did not reflect the real risk of the loans involved. As the reality of the inability of the borrowers to repay began to kick in during 2007, the financial markets which traded these derivatives came under increasing stress and eventually led to a 'sudden stop' in trading and credit intermediation during 2008.

Market Panic and The Great Recession

As borrowers failed to make repayments, this had a knock-on effect among financial institutions who were highly leveraged with financial instruments based on the mortgage market. Lehman Brothers, one of the world's largest investment banks, failed on September 15th 2008, causing widespread panic in financial markets. Due to the fear of an unprecedented collapse in the financial sector which would have untold consequences for the wider economy, the U.S. government and central bank, The Fed, intervened the following day to bailout the United States' largest insurance company, AIG, and to backstop financial markets. The crisis prompted a deep recession, known colloquially as The Great Recession, drawing parallels between this period and The Great Depression. The collapse of credit intermediation in the economy lead to further issues in the real economy, as business were increasingly unable to pay back loans and were forced to lay off staff, driving unemployment to a high of almost 10 percent in 2010. While there has been criticism of the U.S. government's actions to bailout the financial institutions involved, the actions of the government and the Fed are seen by many as having prevented the crisis from spiraling into a depression of the magnitude of The Great Depression.

The Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, was created by the U.S. congress in 1938, in order to maintain liquidity and stability in the domestic mortgage market. The company is a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE), meaning that while it was a publicly traded company for most of its history, it was still supported by the federal government. While there is no legally binding guarantee of shares in GSEs or their securities, it is generally acknowledged that the U.S. government is highly unlikely to let these enterprises fail. Due to these implicit guarantees, GSEs are able to access financing at a reduced cost of interest. Fannie Mae's main activity is the purchasing of mortgage loans from their originators (banks, mortgage brokers etc.) and packaging them into mortgage-backed securities (MBS) in order to ease the access of U.S. homebuyers to housing credit. The early 2000s U.S. mortgage finance boom During the early 2000s, Fannie Mae was swept up in the U.S. housing boom which eventually led to the financial crisis of 2007-2008. The association's stated goal of increasing access of lower income families to housing finance coalesced with the interests of private mortgage lenders and Wall Street investment banks, who had become heavily reliant on the housing market to drive profits. Private lenders had begun to offer riskier mortgage loans in the early 2000s due to low interest rates in the wake of the "Dot Com" crash and their need to maintain profits through increasing the volume of loans on their books. The securitized products created by these private lenders did not maintain the standards which had traditionally been upheld by GSEs. Due to their market share being eaten into by private firms, however, the GSEs involved in the mortgage markets began to also lower their standards, resulting in a 'race to the bottom'. The fall of Fannie Mae The lowering of lending standards was a key factor in creating the housing bubble, as mortgages were now being offered to borrowers with little or no ability to repay the loans. Combined with fraudulent practices from credit ratings agencies, who rated the junk securities created from these mortgage loans as being of the highest standard, this led directly to the financial panic that erupted on Wall Street beginning in 2007. As the U.S. economy slowed down in 2006, mortgage delinquency rates began to spike. Fannie Mae's losses in the mortgage security market in 2006 and 2007, along with the losses of the related GSE 'Freddie Mac', had caused its share value to plummet, stoking fears that it may collapse. On September 7th 2008, Fannie Mae was taken into government conservatorship along with Freddie Mac, with their stocks being delisted from stock exchanges in 2010. This act was seen as an unprecedented direct intervention into the economy by the U.S. government, and a symbol of how far the U.S. housing market had fallen.

With the collapse of the U.S. housing market and the subsequent financial crisis on Wall Street in 2007 and 2008, economies across the globe began to enter into deep recessions. What had started out as a crisis centered on the United States quickly became global in nature, as it became apparent that not only had the economies of other advanced countries (grouped together as the G7) become intimately tied to the U.S. financial system, but that many of them had experienced housing and asset price bubbles similar to that in the U.S.. The United Kingdom had experienced a huge inflation of housing prices since the 1990s, while Eurozone members (such as Germany, France and Italy) had financial sectors which had become involved in reckless lending to economies on the periphery of the EU, such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal. Other countries, such as Japan, were hit heavily due their export-led growth models which suffered from the decline in international trade. Unemployment during the Great Recession As business and consumer confidence crashed, credit markets froze, and international trade contracted, the unemployment rate in the most advanced economies shot up. While four to five percent is generally considered to be a healthy unemployment rate, nearing full employment in the economy (when any remaining unemployment is not related to a lack of consumer demand), many of these countries experienced rates at least double that, with unemployment in the United States peaking at almost 10 percent in 2010. In large countries, unemployment rates of this level meant millions or tens of millions of people being out of work, which led to political pressures to stimulate economies and create jobs. By 2012, many of these countries were seeing declining unemployment rates, however, in France and Italy rates of joblessness continued to increase as the Euro crisis took hold. These countries suffered from having a monetary policy which was too tight for their economies (due to the ECB controlling interest rates) and fiscal policy which was constrained by EU debt rules. Left with the option of deregulating their labor markets and pursuing austerity policies, their unemployment rates remained over 10 percent well into the 2010s. Differences in labor markets The differences in unemployment rates at the peak of the crisis (2009-2010) reflect not only the differences in how economies were affected by the downturn, but also the differing labor market institutions and programs in the various countries. Countries with more 'liberalized' labor markets, such as the United States and United Kingdom experienced sharp jumps in their unemployment rate due to the ease at which employers can lay off workers in these countries. When the crisis subsided in these countries, however, their unemployment rates quickly began to drop below those of the other countries, due to their more dynamic labor markets which make it easier to hire workers when the economy is doing well. On the other hand, countries with more 'coordinated' labor market institutions, such as Germany and Japan, experiences lower rates of unemployment during the crisis, as programs such as short-time work, job sharing, and wage restraint agreements were used to keep workers in their jobs. While these countries are less likely to experience spikes in unemployment during crises, the highly regulated nature of their labor markets mean that they are slower to add jobs during periods of economic prosperity.

From the onset of the Global Financial Crisis in the Summer of 2007, the world economy experienced an almost unprecedented period of turmoil in which millions of people were made unemployed, businesses declared bankruptcy en masse, and structurally critical financial institutions failed. The crisis was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market and subsequent losses by investment banks such as Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and Merrill Lynch. These institutions, which had become over-leveraged with complex financial securities known as derivatives, were tied to each other through a web of financial contracts, meaning that the collapse of one investment bank could trigger the collapse of several others. As Lehman Brothers failed on September 15. 2008, becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, shockwaves were felt throughout the global financial system. The sudden stop of flows of credit worldwide caused a financial panic and sent most of the world's largest economies into a deep recession, later known as the Great Recession. The World Economy in recession
More than any other period in history, the world economy had become highly interconnected and interdependent over the period from the 1970s to 2007. As governments liberalized financial flows, banks and other financial institutions could take money in one country and invest it in another part of the globe. Financial institutions and other non-financial companies became multinational, meaning that they had subsidiaries and partners in many regions. All this meant that when Wall Street, the center of global finance in New York City, was shaken by bankruptcies and credit freezes in late 2007, other advanced economies did not need to wait long to feel the tremors. All of the G7 countries, the seven most economically advanced western-aligned countries, entered recession in 2008, before experiencing an even deeper trough in 2009. While all returned to growth by 2010, this was less stable in the countries of the Eurozone (Germany, France, Italy) over the following years due to the Eurozone crisis, as well as in Japan, which has had issues with low growth since the mid-1990s.

In this Economic Commentary , we compare characteristics of the 2000–2006 house-price boom that preceded the Great Recession to the house-price boom that began in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. These two episodes of high house-price growth have important differences, including the behavior of rental rates, the dynamics of housing supply and demand, and the state of the mortgage market. The absence of changes in fundamentals during the 2000s is consistent with the literature emphasizing house-price beliefs during this prior episode. In contrast to during the 2000s boom, changes in fundamentals (including rent and demand growth) played a more dominant role in the 2020s house-price boom.

Abstract

This research was conducted in Turkey in June-July 2010 as part of the third round of The Financial Crisis Survey. Data from 364 establishments from private nonagricultural formal sector was analyzed to quantify the effect of the 2008 global financial crisis on companies in Turkey.

Researchers revisited establishments interviewed in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008. Efforts were made to contact all respondents of the baseline survey to determine which of the companies were still operating and which were not. From the information collected during telephone interviews, indicators were computed to measure the effects of the financial crisis on key elements of the private economy: sales, employment, finances, and expectations of the future.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study was the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

The manufacturing and services sectors were the primary business sectors of interest. This corresponded to firms classified with International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) codes 15-37, 45, 50-52, 55, 60-64, and 72 (ISIC Rev.3.1). Formal (registered) companies were targeted for interviews. Services firms included construction, retail, wholesale, hotels, restaurants, transport, storage, communications, and IT. Firms with 100% government ownership were excluded.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

1152 establishments that participated in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008 were contacted for The Financial Crisis Survey. The implementing contractor received directions that the final achieved sample should include at least 650 establishments.

Stratified random sampling was used in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008. Three levels of stratification were implemented: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region).

For industry stratification, the universe was divided into 5 manufacturing industries, 1 services industry -retail -, and two residual sectors. Each manufacturing industry had a target of 160 interviews. The services industry and the two residual sectors had a target of 120 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 33% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel.

Size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

Regional stratification was defined in 5 regions. These regions are Marmara, Aegean, South, Central Anatolia and Black Sea-Eastern.

The Turkey sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel "Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Turkey" consisted of 1325 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 425 establishments have been re-interviewed.

Given the stratified design, sample frames containing a complete and updated list of establishments for the selected regions were required. Great efforts were made to obtain the best source for these listings. However, the quality of the sample frames was not optimal and, therefore, some adjustments were needed to correct for the presence of ineligible units. These adjustments are reflected in the weights computation.

The source of the sample frame was twofold. Universe estimates were taken from the TOBB database which contains a full list of establishments in manufacturing sectors. TOBB refers to the Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey. Universe estimates for service sectors were taken from the Statistical Institute of Statistics (SIS) with additional information based on SIC code from the Turkish Studies Institute (TSI). Comparisons were made between estimates in TOBB and SIS to establish that the two sources are comparable and hence can be used side by side.

The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project. The frame proved to be useful though it showed positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. These problems are typical of establishment surveys, but given the impact these inaccuracies may have on the results, adjustments were needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of contacts to complete the survey was 43% (2811 out of 6458 establishments).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Research instrument

The following survey instrument is available: - Financial Crisis Survey Questionnaire

Cleaning operations

Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks and callbacks.

Following the drastic increase directly after the COVID-19 pandemic, the delinquency rate started to gradually decline, falling below *** percent in the second quarter of 2023. In the second half of 2023, the delinquency rate picked up but remained stable throughout 2024. In the second quarter of 2025, **** percent of mortgage loans were delinquent. That was significantly lower than the **** percent during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 or the peak of *** percent during the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007-2010. What does the mortgage delinquency rate tell us? The mortgage delinquency rate is the share of the total number of mortgaged home loans in the U.S. where payment is overdue by 30 days or more. Many borrowers eventually manage to service their loan, though, as indicated by the markedly lower foreclosure rates. Total home mortgage debt in the U.S. stood at almost ** trillion U.S. dollars in 2024. Not all mortgage loans are made equal ‘Subprime’ loans, being targeted at high-risk borrowers and generally coupled with higher interest rates to compensate for the risk. These loans have far higher delinquency rates than conventional loans. Defaulting on such loans was one of the triggers for the 2007-2010 financial crisis, with subprime delinquency rates reaching almost ** percent around this time. These higher delinquency rates translate into higher foreclosure rates, which peaked at just under ** percent of all subprime mortgages in 2011.

The benchmark interest rate in Canada was last recorded at 2.25 percent. This dataset provides - Canada Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

On October 3. 2008, the United States Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which created the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). TARP was essentially a government bailout package designed to purchase non-performing assets and equity shares from financial firms which had come close to bankruptcy during the Global Financial Crisis. In particular, the measures sought to address the issue of the vast number of toxic subprime mortgage assets which were on the balance sheets of U.S. financial institutions. TARP programs for banks, car manufacturers and insurance U.S. financial institutions were suffering from a loss spiral, whereby they were forced to sell assets in order to remain liquid (able to meet short-term financing needs with cash), but the act of having to sell these assets decreased their market price, requiring the firms to sell more assets. This spiral was quickly causing panic on financial markets, requiring government intervention to backstop asset prices and prevent further bankruptcies. Of the approximately 418 billion U.S. dollars disbursed by 2012, the majority went to bank bailout programs, while smaller amounts went to bailouts of the automotive industry and the insurance group AIG. A majority of the funds were paid back to the U.S. government through sales of assets or repayments by the receivers of support, while around 23 billion was written off or declared as a loss.

Graph and download economic data for Homeownership Rate in the United States (RHORUSQ156N) from Q1 1965 to Q2 2025 about homeownership, housing, rate, and USA.

From the Summer of 2007 until the end of 2009 (at least), the world was gripped by a series of economic crises commonly known as the Global Financial Crisis (2007-2008) and the Great Recession (2008-2009). The financial crisis was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market, which caused panic on Wall Street, the center of global finance in New York. Due to the outsized nature of the U.S. economy compared to other countries and particularly the centrality of U.S. finance for the world economy, the crisis spread quickly to other countries, affecting most regions across the globe. By 2009, global GDP growth was in negative territory, with international credit markets frozen, international trade contracting, and tens of millions of workers being made unemployed.

Global similarities, global differences

Since the 1980s, the world economy had entered a period of integration and globalization. This process particularly accelerated after the collapse of the Soviet Union ended the Cold War (1947-1991). This was the period of the 'Washington Consensus', whereby the U.S. and international institutions such as the World Bank and IMF promoted policies of economic liberalization across the globe. This increasing interdependence and openness to the global economy meant that when the crisis hit in 2007, many countries experienced the same issues. This is particularly evident in the synchronization of the recessions in the most advanced economies of the G7. Nevertheless, the aggregate global GDP number masks the important regional differences which occurred during the recession. While the more advanced economies of North America, Western Europe, and Japan were all hit hard, along with countries who are reliant on them for trade or finance, large emerging economies such as India and China bucked this trend. In particular, China's huge fiscal stimulus in 2008-2009 likely did much to prevent the global economy from sliding further into a depression. In 2009, while the United States' GDP sank to -2.6 percent, China's GDP, as reported by national authorities, was almost 10 percent.

The Great Recession was a period of economic contraction which came in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008. The recession was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market and subsequent bankruptcies among Wall Street financial institutions, the most significant of which being the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. These economic convulsions caused consumer confidence, measured by the Consumer Confidence Index (CCI), to drop sharply in 2007 and the beginning of 2008. How does the Consumer Confidence Index work? The CCI measures household's expectation of their future economic situation and, consequently, their likely future spending and savings decisions. A score of 100 in the index would indicate a neutral economic outlook, with consumers neither being optimistic nor pessimistic about the near future. Scores below 100 are then more pessimistic, while scores above 100 indicate optimism about the economy. Consumer confidence can have a self-fulfilling effect on the economy, as when consumers are pessimistic about the economy, they tend to save and postpone spending, contracting aggregate demand and causing the economy to slow down. Conversely, when consumers are optimistic and willing to spend, this can have a reinforcing effect as wages and employment may rise when consumers spend more. CCI and the Great Recession As the reality of the trouble which the U.S. financial sector was in set in over 2007, consumer confidence dropped sharply from being slightly positive, to being deeply pessimistic by the Summer of 2008. While confidence began to slowly rebound up until September 2008, with the panic caused by Lehman's bankruptcy and the freezing of new credit creation, the CCI plummeted once more, reaching its lowest point during the recession in February 2008. The U.S. government stepped in to prevent the bankruptcy of AIG in 2008, promising to do the same for any future possible failures in the financial system. This 'backstopping' policy, whereby the government assured that the economy would not be allowed to fall further into crisis, along with the Federal Reserve's unconventional monetary policies used to restart the economy, contributed to a rebound in consumer confidence in 2009 and 2010. In spite of this, consumers still remained pessimistic about the economy.

Investment trusts have navigated a turbulent environment over recent years, characterised by regulatory changes and uncertain economic conditions. While demand for investment trusts has stayed fairly strong, alternative investment vehicles like open-ended investment companies have put pressure with their competitive prices, encouraging investment trusts to band together through consolidation to drive down fees charged thanks to economies of scale. Revenue is expected to grow at a compound annual rate of 2.9% over the five years through 2025-26 to £1.7 billion, including estimated growth of 6.5% in 2025-26, while the average industry profit margin is anticipated to be 27.4%. After the financial crisis in 2008, ultra-low interest rates supported equity growth as investors sought attractive returns from companies supported by cheap lending rates. This environment came to an end in 2022, as interest rates picked up rapidly amid spiralling inflation. As a result, bond values plummeted, and stock markets recorded lacklustre growth, hurting investment income. Although the rising base rate environment persisted into 2023-24, investors priced in rate cuts near the end of 2023, triggering a rally in stock markets. Capital also flowed into bonds as investors sought to lock in higher yields before they would potentially decline in 2024-25. In 2025-26, trusts will likely limit their exposure to US markets despite healthy growth seen from big tech firms in 2024-25, cautious of US fiscal policy, rising debt and the risk that trade tariffs will trigger a recession. Bond markets will also remain volatile, with markets unsure about the speed of rate cuts amid trade tensions. However, a declining base rate environment will drive prices up and support returns for investment trusts. Investment trust revenue is expected to grow at a compound annual rate of 4.6% over the five years through 2029-30 to £2.1 billion. Investors will continue to reduce their exposure to the dollar, with the European Stoxx index positioned for healthy growth in the short term, being seen as an effective safe haven in uncertain times. However, regulatory changes proposed by the Financial Conduct Authority have been contentious, putting investment trusts at a disadvantage to alternative investment vehicles like OEICs. Investment trusts will seek acquisitive growth, using mergers and acquisitions to minimise fixed costs through scale and ramp up competitiveness.

With the onset of the Global Financial Crisis in the late Summer of 2007, the United Kingdom was one of the first countries to experience financial panic after the United States. In September 2007, the bank Northern Rock became the UK's first bank to collapse in 150 years due to a bank run, as depositors reacted to the announcement that the bank would be seeking emergency liquidity support from the Bank of England by lining up outside their bank branches to withdraw money. The failure of Northern Rock was a bad omen for the UK economy and financial sector, as banks stopped lending to each other and to customers in what became known as the 'credit crunch'. Government bailouts, private bailouts By October 2008, many UK banks were facing a situation where if they did not receive external assistance, then they would have to default on their debts and likely have to declare bankruptcy. The UK's Labour government, led by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, announced that it would provide emergency funds to stabilize the banking system, leading to the part or full nationalization of some of Britain's largest financial firms. Specifically, Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds TSB, and HBOS received over 35 billion pounds in a government cash injection, while Barclays opted to seek investment from private investors in order to avoid nationalization, much of which came from the state of Qatar. The bailouts caused UK government debt ratios to almost double over the period of the crisis, while public trust in the financial system sank.

The statistic lists the 20 countries with the lowest inflation rate in 2024. In 2023, China ranked 6th with an inflation rate of about 0.21 percent compared to the previous year. Inflation rates and the financial crisis Due to relatively stagnant worker wages as well as a hesitation from banks to so easily distribute loans to the ordinary citizen, inflation has remained considerably low. Low inflation rates are most apparent in European countries, which stems from the on-going Eurozone debt crisis as well as from the global financial crisis of 2008. With continuous economical struggles and a currently sensitive economic situation throughout Europe, precautions were taken in order to maintain stability and to prevent consequential breakdowns, such as those in Greece and Spain. Additionally, the average European consumer had to endure financial setbacks, causing doubt in the general future of the entire European Union, as evident in the consumer confidence statistics, which in turn raised the question, if several handpicked countries should step out of the EU in order to improve its economic position. Greece, while perhaps experiencing the largest economic drought out of all European countries, improved on its inflation rate. The situation within the country is slowly improving itself as a result of a recent bailout as well as economic stimulus packages issued by the European Union. Furthermore, the Greek government managed its revenues and expenses more competently in comparison to the prime of the global and the Greek financial crisis, with annual expenses only slightly exceeding yearly revenues.

The Global Financial Crisis (2007-2008), which began due to the collapse of the U.S. housing market, had a negative effect in many regions across the globe. The global recession which followed the crisis in 2008 and 2009 showed how interdependent and synchronized many of the world's economies had become, with the largest advanced economies showing very similar patterns of negative GDP growth during the crisis. Among the largest emerging economies (commonly referred to as the 'E7'), however, a different pattern emerged, with some countries avoiding a recession altogether. Some commentators have particularly pointed to 2008-2009 as the moment in which China emerged on the world stage as an economic superpower and a key driver of global economic growth. The Great Recession in the developing world While some countries, such as Russia, Mexico, and Turkey, experienced severe recessions due to their connections to the United States and Europe, others such as China, India, and Indonesia managed to record significant economic growth during the period. This can be partly explained by the decoupling from western financial systems which these countries undertook following the Asian financial crises of 1997, making many Asian nations more wary of opening their countries to 'hot money' from other countries. Other likely explanations of this trend are that these countries have large domestic economies which are not entirely reliant on the advanced economies, that their export sectors produce goods which are inelastic (meaning they are still bought during recessions), and that the Chinese economic stimulus worth almost 600 billion U.S. dollars in 2008/2009 increased growth in the region.

Abstract

This research was conducted in Kazakhstan in February-March 2010 as part of the second round of The Financial Crisis Survey. Data from 233 establishments from private nonagricultural formal sector was analyzed to quantify the effect of the 2008 global financial crisis on companies in Kazakhstan.

Researchers revisited establishments interviewed in Kazakhstan Enterprise Survey 2009. Efforts were made to contact all respondents of the baseline survey to determine which of the companies were still operating and which were not. From the information collected during telephone interviews, indicators were computed to measure the effects of the financial crisis on key elements of the private economy: sales, employment, finances, and expectations of the future.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study was the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

The manufacturing and services sectors were the primary business sectors of interest. This corresponded to firms classified with International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) codes 15-37, 45, 50-52, 55, 60-64, and 72 (ISIC Rev.3.1). Formal (registered) companies were targeted for interviews. Services firms included construction, retail, wholesale, hotels, restaurants, transport, storage, communications, and IT. Firms with 100% government ownership were excluded.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

544 establishments that participated in Kazakhstan Enterprise Survey 2009 were contacted for The Financial Crisis Survey.

The sample for Kazakhstan Enterprise Survey 2009 was selected using stratified random sampling. Three levels of stratification were used: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region).

Industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into 23 manufacturing industries, 2 services industries -retail and IT-, and one residual sector. Each sector had a target of 177 interviews.

Size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

Regional stratification was defined in five regions. These regions are North, West, East, South, and Central.

Given the stratified design, sample frames containing a complete and updated list of establishments for the selected regions were required. Great efforts were made to obtain the best source for these listings. However, the quality of the sample frames was not optimal and, therefore, some adjustments were needed to correct for the presence of ineligible units. These adjustments are reflected in the weights computation.

For most countries covered in 2008-2009 BEEPS two sample frames were used. The first frame for Kazakhstan was a file of establishments obtained from the Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. A copy of that frame was sent to the statistical team in London to select the establishments for interview. The second frame, supplied by the World Bank/EBRD, consisted of enterprises interviewed in BEEPS 2005. The clients required that the attempts should be made to re-interview establishments responding to the BEEPS 2005 survey where they were within the selected geographical regions and met eligibility criteria. That sample is referred to as the Panel.

The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project. The frame proved to be useful though it showed positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. These problems are typical of establishment surveys, but given the impact these inaccuracies may have on the results, adjustments were needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of contacts to complete the survey was 36% (609 out of 1686 establishments).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Research instrument

The following survey instrument is available: - Financial Crisis Survey Questionnaire

Cleaning operations

Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks and callbacks.

This statistic shows public evaluation of who was to blame for the economic problems in each country as of 2012. 78 percent of respondents in Spain felt that it was the banks and financial institutions that were most to blame for the current economic problems in their own country as of 2012.

The Great Recession of 2008-2009 caused a dramatic drop in the volume of world trade, after two decades of nearly unbroken growth in export growth across the globe. The Global Financial Crisis, which began in the United States in the Summer of 2007, but quickly spread to other regions, caused international flows of money to freeze. This lack of international financing in the global economy led to a drop in aggregate demand, as well as causing many goods exporters to be unable to finance short-term expenditures on credit. World merchandise exports collapsed in 2009, falling by around one-fifth. This fall was made up quickly in the recovery, however, as exports already surpassed their 2008 levels by 2011.

Following the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, countries across the world were thrown into recession. In comparison to North America, Europe, and Japan, however, many parts of the globe experienced less severe effects of the crisis, with some avoiding going into recession at all. Particularly in Africa and South & East Asia, many countries experienced a dip in their annual GDP growth, but still recorded high growth rates of over 2.5 percent. South Asia in particular actually experienced an increase in growth during the recession, bucking global trends. Latin America and the Caribbean was the only one of these regions to enter recession in 2009, due to the outsized importance of the United States as a partner in trade and finance for the region.