arbiter
JournalsAccount

Cash for Transactions or Store‐of‐Value? A Comparative Study on Scandinavian Countries and Canada

Carl Andreas Claussen et al.

International Finance2026https://doi.org/10.1111/infi.70028article
ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

We estimate the demand for transactional and non‐transactional cash balances (banknotes and coins) in Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Norway over the last decades exploiting the seasonality of cash demand. These countries share many features that are relevant for cash demand, but nevertheless show large differences in terms of aggregate cash balances. While Canada, Iceland and Denmark have seen increased aggregate cash balances, Norway and especially Sweden have seen a dramatic decline. We find that transactional balances have decreased somewhat in all of the countries and the differences in aggregated cash balances is due to differences in the development of non‐transactional cash balances. We argue that different de facto legal tender status, crisis exposures, foreign demand and cash supply‐side policies help explain these findings.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/infi.70028

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{carl2026,
  title        = {{Cash for Transactions or Store‐of‐Value? A Comparative Study on Scandinavian Countries and Canada}},
  author       = {Carl Andreas Claussen et al.},
  journal      = {International Finance},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/infi.70028},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Cash for Transactions or Store‐of‐Value? A Comparative Study on Scandinavian Countries and Canada

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.