Rewiring Money: Technology, Monetary Infrastructure, and the Emerging Architecture of the Global Monetary System
Updated: Sep 21
Abstract
The global monetary system is undergoing one of its most significant structural transformations since the collapse of the Bretton Woods exchange-rate regime in the early 1970s.
The transformation is frequently described as a competition among cash, central bank digital currencies, cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, and tokenized assets. Such framing, however, understates the deeper change.
The central development is not simply the emergence of new forms of money; it is the reconstruction of the infrastructure through which monetary claims are created, transferred, cleared, collateralized, settled, and governed.
Historically, monetary systems have evolved through changes in both institutional arrangements and technology. Bretton Woods organized international monetary relations around fixed-but-adjustable exchange rates anchored to a dollar convertible into gold.
The suspension of dollar-gold convertibility in 1971 and the transition to floating exchange rates by 1973 established the foundations of the modern fiat currency system. Subsequent decades saw the rise of inflation-targeting central banks, liberalized capital markets, globally integrated banking networks, electronic payment systems, and a highly dollar-centered international financial architecture.
The Global Financial Crisis of 2007–2009 produced another structural break as central banks expanded their balance sheets, adopted large-scale asset purchases, supplied extraordinary liquidity, and increasingly implemented monetary policy through remunerated reserve balances rather than through scarcity of reserves alone.
The current transformation adds a technological layer to these institutional changes. Instant-payment networks, application programming interfaces, distributed ledgers, tokenized deposits, stablecoins, wholesale central bank digital currencies, programmable settlement, digital identity, and automated compliance are gradually altering the architecture beneath monetary exchange.
This paper argues that the most plausible medium-term outcome is neither the disappearance of sovereign currencies nor the replacement of banks by decentralized cryptocurrencies.
Instead, the emerging system is likely to be a hybrid, digitally programmable, increasingly interoperable monetary architecture in which central bank money continues to provide the settlement anchor, commercial banks continue creating most transactional money, tokenized deposits and regulated stablecoins coexist, and multiple cross-border networks compete and interconnect.
At the international level, this technological transformation is likely to generate greater currency diversification without automatically overturning dollar dominance. As of the first quarter of 2026, the U.S. dollar represented approximately 57.1% of global foreign-exchange reserves, compared with about 20.0% for the euro and 2.0% for the renminbi.
Meanwhile, the dollar remained on one side of approximately 89% of foreign-exchange transactions in the 2025 BIS Triennial Survey. These figures demonstrate that currency dominance depends not merely on payment technology but on deep financial markets, safe assets, institutional credibility, liquidity, network effects, and the structure of global credit.
The central question for the coming decades is therefore not whether money becomes digital—it already largely is—but who controls the infrastructure on which digital money moves, what form settlement takes, which assets anchor that system, and how technological change redistributes monetary power among states, central banks, commercial banks, technology firms, and global financial networks.
1. Introduction
Money should not be understood simply as currency in circulation. A modern monetary system is a layered institutional structure consisting of units of account, central bank liabilities, commercial bank deposits, securities, collateral, clearing systems, settlement systems, payment networks, foreign-exchange markets, legal frameworks, regulatory institutions, and credibility mechanisms.
The public normally encounters only the top layer: deposits, cards, mobile applications, cash, and increasingly digital wallets. Underneath those interfaces lies an extensive infrastructure that determines whether a monetary claim can be transferred, whether it settles with finality, whether different claims trade at par, and whether liquidity remains available during financial stress.
This distinction between money as an instrument and monetary infrastructure as a system is essential for understanding the present transformation.
A dollar bank deposit, for example, is not technically identical to a Federal Reserve liability. It is a liability of a private commercial bank that is convertible into central bank money.
Similarly, tokenized commercial-bank deposits, stablecoins, central bank digital currencies, and conventional deposits may all function as payment instruments while possessing fundamentally different balance-sheet structures.
The monetary architecture therefore resembles a hierarchy:
Central bank money → regulated bank money → nonbank monetary claims → financial assets and credit instruments.
The stability of the system depends heavily on the convertibility among these layers.
The Bank for International Settlements describes one critical property as the “singleness of money”: different monetary instruments denominated in the same national unit must ordinarily exchange at par. Central-bank settlement acts as an institutional mechanism supporting that equivalence.
BIS research consequently places central bank reserves, commercial bank money, and high-quality financial assets at the center of prospective tokenized monetary systems.
The transformation now underway can therefore be interpreted as a migration from:
siloed databases + sequential messaging + intermediary reconciliation
toward:
interoperable networks + programmable claims + automated compliance + increasingly simultaneous settlement.
The difference is profound.
The first architecture developed incrementally around twentieth-century banking institutions.
The second could eventually permit assets, money, compliance rules, collateral, and contractual instructions to interact within integrated digital environments.
The principal thesis of this paper is that the global monetary system is entering a transition from an electronic but institutionally fragmented monetary architecture toward a digitally native and programmable architecture, while retaining many of the underlying institutions of the existing two-tier monetary system.
2. Historical Foundations of the Modern Monetary Order
2.1 Bretton Woods and the Postwar Monetary System
The Bretton Woods arrangements created in 1944 attempted to reconcile international monetary stability with national macroeconomic policy autonomy. Participating economies maintained fixed but adjustable exchange rates against the U.S. dollar, while the dollar itself was convertible into gold for official purposes.
Once the system became fully operational, international balances were largely settled using dollars, with official dollar convertibility maintained at $35 per ounce of gold. This architecture effectively placed the United States at the center of the postwar international monetary system.
The arrangement contained an inherent structural tension.
International economic growth required an expanding supply of reserve assets and dollars.
Yet persistent expansion of dollar liabilities relative to the American gold stock ultimately weakened confidence in the promise that those liabilities could be converted into gold.
This tension became associated with the Triffin dilemma.
By August 1971, the United States suspended official dollar convertibility into gold. Attempts to preserve modified fixed exchange rates proved temporary. By March 1973, most major currencies were floating against one another, effectively ending the Bretton Woods exchange-rate regime.
The importance of this transition is difficult to overstate.
It replaced an international monetary system whose nominal anchor involved gold convertibility with one in which national fiat currencies ultimately depended on monetary institutions, fiscal capacity, legal systems, and confidence in central banks.
3. From Fiat Money to Central-Bank-Centered Macroeconomic
Management
The decades following Bretton Woods gradually produced another institutional consensus.
Monetary policy became increasingly centered on central-bank control of short-term interest rates. Beginning with New Zealand and spreading across advanced and emerging economies, explicit or implicit inflation-targeting regimes became widespread during the 1990s and 2000s.
Transparency, central-bank communication, expectations management, and policy-rate adjustments increasingly replaced exchange-rate pegs or monetary-aggregate targeting as the central operating framework.
At the same time, financial globalization accelerated.
Commercial banking networks expanded internationally. Capital controls were reduced in many jurisdictions. Foreign-exchange markets deepened. Derivatives markets expanded dramatically. Securities markets became increasingly integrated.
This created an important paradox.
National central banks controlled domestic monetary policy, but financial conditions increasingly responded to global capital flows and financial cycles.
Rey's global financial-cycle research argues that international credit conditions, leverage, capital flows, and asset prices can constrain domestic monetary autonomy even under floating exchange rates. In this interpretation, financial globalization changes the classical monetary-policy “trilemma” by making global financial conditions an independent source of domestic monetary pressure. (Rey, 2013, 2015).
Technology therefore did not initially decentralize monetary power. In many respects, electronic finance increased the speed with which monetary conditions in major financial centers propagated globally.
4. The 2008 Financial Crisis and the Transformation of Monetary Policy
The Global Financial Crisis created another structural break.
Before 2008, public descriptions of monetary policy often emphasized adjustments to a short-term policy interest rate. During the crisis, policy increasingly operated through central-bank balance sheets as well.
Central banks introduced or dramatically expanded:
emergency liquidity facilities;
long-term refinancing operations;
central-bank swap lines;
large-scale government-bond purchases;
mortgage and private-asset purchases;
forward guidance;
negative interest rates in some jurisdictions;
remunerated reserve systems;
and macroprudential financial regulation.
The Federal Reserve began large-scale securities purchases in late 2008. The ECB later adopted targeted longer-term refinancing operations, negative deposit rates, private-asset purchases, and sovereign-bond purchases. Central-bank balance sheets subsequently became structurally larger than had previously been considered normal.
This changed monetary infrastructure itself.
In the United States, the payment of interest on reserves became an increasingly important mechanism through which the Federal Reserve controlled short-term interest rates in an environment with abundant reserves. The operational framework of monetary policy therefore shifted from managing reserve scarcity toward administering rates within a reserve-abundant banking system.
The pandemic shock of 2020 strengthened this tendency. Central banks again expanded liquidity provision and asset purchases while governments deployed unusually large fiscal interventions. The subsequent global inflation episode and policy tightening demonstrated that central-bank balance sheets, administered interest rates, fiscal policy, supply shocks, and financial conditions had become deeply interconnected.
Modern monetary policy consequently operates through both the price of central-bank money and the structure of central-bank balance sheets.
5. The Infrastructure Beneath Modern Money
Modern monetary infrastructure can analytically be separated into seven layers.
Layer 1: Unit of Account
Currencies such as the dollar, euro, yen, pound, and renminbi provide units in which prices, wages, debts, taxes, and financial contracts are denominated.
This is the most fundamental monetary network effect.
Changing a payment technology does not automatically change the unit of account.
A dollar stablecoin, for example, may alter how dollars are transferred without creating a new unit of account.
Layer 2: Central Bank Money
Central banks issue currency and reserve balances.
For financial institutions, reserves provide the highest-level domestic settlement asset because payment in central-bank money eliminates credit exposure to another private bank.
Layer 3: Commercial Bank Money
Most money used by households and businesses takes the form of bank deposits.
Commercial banks create deposit money through lending and asset acquisition while maintaining convertibility between those deposits and central-bank money.
Layer 4: Nonbank Monetary Claims
Money-market funds, electronic-money issuers, stablecoins, and other instruments can perform money-like functions without being conventional bank deposits.
The growth of this layer is especially important because technological innovation allows nonbank money to circulate at global scale.
Layer 5: Messaging, Clearing, and Settlement
A payment is not a single technological event.
It can involve:
instruction,
authentication,
messaging,
compliance screening,
clearing,
liquidity management,
foreign-exchange conversion,
and final settlement.
Many inefficiencies in cross-border payments derive from the fact that these processes occur through multiple institutions and databases.
Layer 6: Collateral and Safe Assets
Government securities, particularly highly liquid sovereign debt, form an important foundation for secured borrowing, derivatives markets, central-bank operations, and reserve management.
Any analysis of international monetary power that focuses exclusively on payment technology therefore misses a central variable: the supply of credible and liquid safe assets.
Layer 7: International Liquidity Networks
Correspondent banks, foreign-exchange markets, swap lines, payment-versus-payment systems, reserve assets, and global dollar funding networks connect national monetary systems.
These layers explain why changing the monetary system requires much more than introducing a new digital token.
6. Technology Is Reconstructing These Layers
6.1 Instant-Payment Systems
One major transformation has occurred without blockchain technology.
Domestic instant-payment systems can increasingly transfer funds between users within seconds.
The BIS reports that more than 70 countries now possess domestic systems capable of near-instant payments. Project Nexus emerged from efforts to interconnect such national systems so that cross-border payments could potentially travel through standardized links instead of requiring customized bilateral connections among every payment network.
This illustrates an important principle:
financial innovation does not require replacing existing money.
A country's currency and banking system may remain fundamentally unchanged while the infrastructure transmitting monetary claims becomes dramatically faster.
7. Tokenization: From Digital Records to Executable Financial Claims
Most modern money is already digital.
Tokenization therefore does not merely mean converting physical money into electronic information.
The more significant innovation is transforming a financial claim into a programmable object capable of interacting automatically with other assets and contractual conditions.
A tokenized security could potentially contain or interact with rules governing:
ownership;
transferability;
collateralization;
regulatory eligibility;
settlement;
corporate actions;
and conditional payments.
This can reduce the institutional separation between trade execution, record keeping, clearing, and settlement.
The BIS has proposed a model in which tokenized central-bank reserves, tokenized commercial-bank money, and tokenized government securities coexist on programmable platforms. The objective is to preserve central-bank settlement while introducing greater composability and automation.
The critical technological concept is atomic settlement.
In conventional markets, one leg of a transaction may settle before another. This creates counterparty and settlement risk.
Programmable platforms can theoretically condition the transfer of one asset on the simultaneous transfer of another:
asset transfer ⇄ payment transfer
rather than:
asset transfer → reconciliation → payment → settlement.
This potentially reduces settlement risk, collateral requirements, reconciliation costs, and operational complexity.
8. Central Bank Digital Currencies
CBDCs are frequently discussed as if they were a single technology. They are better divided into two categories.
8.1 Retail CBDCs
Retail CBDCs would give households and businesses access to digital claims ultimately issued by a central bank.
Potential advantages include:
resilient public payment infrastructure;
competition in payments;
financial inclusion in some jurisdictions;
offline digital payments;
preservation of access to public money as cash usage declines.
However, retail CBDCs create a fundamental banking-policy problem.
If households can move large amounts of money from commercial deposits directly into risk-free central-bank liabilities, particularly during financial stress, deposit flight could become faster.
Keister and Sanches (2023) formalize this tension. Their model finds that CBDCs can improve exchange efficiency while potentially crowding out bank deposits, raising bank funding costs, and affecting credit creation.
Schilling, Fernández-Villaverde, and Uhlig (2024) likewise demonstrate that large-scale CBDC adoption can create difficult interactions among monetary stability, price stability, and banking stability.
These concerns explain why proposed retail CBDC designs frequently consider holding limits, non-remuneration, or intermediated distribution.
8.2 Wholesale CBDCs and Tokenized Central-Bank Reserves
Wholesale CBDCs may prove more consequential for financial markets.
Rather than replacing retail bank accounts, wholesale digital central-bank money can provide settlement for financial institutions operating on programmable platforms.
The 2024 BIS survey found that 91% of 93 surveyed central banks were exploring retail or wholesale CBDCs, with wholesale work generally at a more advanced stage.
This distinction suggests that the first major CBDC transformation may occur behind the financial system rather than in consumer wallets.
9. Stablecoins: New Money or New Payment Rail?
Stablecoins occupy an ambiguous position.
A fiat-backed stablecoin generally represents a privately issued digital liability promising redemption into sovereign currency.
Economically, this makes many stablecoins closer to a new form of private money than to an independent currency.
Their importance comes from combining:
global internet distribution;
continuous settlement;
programmable transfer;
compatibility with tokenized financial markets;
relatively low technological barriers to cross-border use.
Yet stablecoins confront problems that conventional banking systems were historically designed to manage.
These include:
redemption risk;
reserve quality;
liquidity risk;
operational concentration;
fragmentation between issuers;
cyber risk;
regulatory arbitrage;
and potential instability under runs.
BIS analysis argues that stablecoins can struggle to guarantee the same degree of monetary “singleness” as regulated deposits because different stablecoins may trade at different prices and rely on different reserve structures.
Empirical research also suggests that stablecoins remain closely connected to conventional monetary conditions rather than operating outside them. Aldasoro et al. (2025), for example, find that U.S. monetary-policy shocks affect stablecoin markets, demonstrating that digital private money remains linked to traditional monetary conditions.
Stablecoins therefore do not necessarily represent escape from sovereign currency.
In fact, because the largest stablecoins are dollar denominated, their international expansion could in some circumstances extend dollar-based financial intermediation beyond conventional banking channels. Federal Reserve research discussions in 2026 explicitly examined this possibility.
This creates what might be called the stablecoin paradox:
technologies originally associated with monetary decentralization may reinforce the international reach of an existing sovereign currency.
10. Cross-Border Payments: The Most Important Near-Term Battleground
Domestic payments in many economies have become extremely fast.
Cross-border payments remain considerably more complicated.
An international transfer may involve:
sender → sending bank → correspondent bank → FX intermediary → correspondent bank → receiving bank → recipient.
Each institution performs some combination of messaging, compliance, liquidity management, currency conversion, reconciliation, and settlement.
The Financial Stability Board reported in 2025 that international reform initiatives had produced progress but had not yet resulted in sufficiently broad improvements for end users, illustrating how institutional coordination can lag technological capability.
Several technological strategies are now competing.
Strategy 1: Improve Correspondent Banking
Existing banks can adopt:
standardized messaging;
APIs;
tokenized deposits;
automated compliance;
better digital identity;
and faster settlement.
Strategy 2: Connect Domestic Instant-Payment Systems
Project Nexus illustrates this approach.
Rather than replacing domestic infrastructures, national fast-payment networks can be connected through common protocols. Participating Asian central banks established Nexus Global Payments in 2025 to move the concept toward live implementation.
Strategy 3: Multi-CBDC Platforms
Project mBridge explored a shared distributed-ledger platform connecting commercial banks and multiple central banks through wholesale CBDCs. It reached a minimum viable product stage in 2024.
Strategy 4: Stablecoin-Based Settlement
Stablecoins can route payments through public or permissioned blockchain networks without relying on the full conventional correspondent-banking chain.
Strategy 5: Tokenized Commercial-Bank Networks
Commercial banks may instead place conventional deposit liabilities on programmable networks.
The probable result is not one global platform but competition among multiple interoperable infrastructures.
11. Why the Dollar Has Remained Dominant
Predictions of rapid dollar displacement often treat reserve currencies as if they were technologies that can be replaced by superior software.
Historical evidence suggests otherwise.
International currency dominance depends on multiple reinforcing networks:
trade invoicing;
foreign-exchange liquidity;
bank funding;
sovereign debt markets;
derivatives;
international loans;
corporate debt;
reserves;
collateral;
payment systems;
and expectations about what other market participants will use.
Gopinath et al.'s (2020) Dominant Currency Paradigm demonstrates how dollar invoicing strongly influences international trade prices and quantities even when the United States is not one of the two trading partners. The authors find that a broad dollar appreciation can reduce trade among countries outside the United States, illustrating the global transmission power produced by dominant-currency pricing.
The dollar remains deeply entrenched in financial markets as well.
The 2025 BIS Triennial Survey found global foreign-exchange turnover of approximately $9.6 trillion per day. The dollar appeared on one side of roughly 89% of transactions. The euro was involved in approximately 29%, while the renminbi reached roughly 8.5%. Because each FX transaction contains two currencies, these percentages sum to approximately 200 rather than 100.
Reserve holdings display somewhat greater diversification.
According to IMF COFER data for 2026 Q1:
U.S. dollar: 57.13%
euro: 20.03%
Chinese renminbi: 1.99%
Japanese yen: 5.44%
Other currencies collectively account for a growing minority of reserves.
The important conclusion is that diversification and displacement are not synonymous.
A decline in one currency's reserve share can occur alongside continued dominance in funding, derivatives, invoicing, payments, and foreign exchange.
12. Technology and the Future of Reserve Currencies
Digital technology can nevertheless influence international currency competition.
Historically, using a foreign currency required access to its banking system.
Tokenized money can lower that barrier.
A person or firm outside the United States might obtain tokenized dollar claims without maintaining a traditional U.S. bank account. A foreign CBDC could similarly become technically accessible beyond its domestic banking network.
The IMF therefore notes that improvements in payment efficiency could influence international currency adoption. Digital money may make certain currencies easier to acquire and use across borders.
Yet technology cannot independently manufacture the underlying characteristics of an international reserve currency.
A globally important currency generally requires:
deep capital markets;
substantial quantities of safe assets;
convertibility;
liquid foreign-exchange markets;
predictable institutions;
credible monetary policy;
legal protections;
and network scale.
Consequently, superior payment infrastructure could increase the international usage of a currency without necessarily transforming it into the dominant reserve asset.
This distinction will be central to future monetary competition.
13. Geopolitical Fragmentation and Monetary Infrastructure
Monetary infrastructure has increasingly become entangled with geopolitics.
Governments and central banks have shown greater interest in:
reserve diversification;
alternative payment channels;
bilateral currency settlement;
regional payment systems;
central bank digital currencies;
and mechanisms reducing dependence on a single international network.
The ECB has documented evidence that trade-invoicing patterns and geopolitical alignments have become more closely related in recent years, while central banks have increased gold accumulation and explored alternative payment infrastructures.
However, fragmentation has important economic costs.
Separate monetary blocs could increase:
foreign-exchange costs;
liquidity fragmentation;
collateral fragmentation;
duplicated compliance;
settlement complexity;
and barriers to global capital allocation.
This produces a tension between:
monetary sovereignty and geopolitical resilience
and
network efficiency and global liquidity.
The likely solution is partial diversification rather than total separation.
Countries may build alternative payment rails and increase reserve diversification while continuing to use dollar markets wherever liquidity and financing advantages remain substantial.
14. Artificial Intelligence and Automated Financial Infrastructure
Artificial intelligence is another important but sometimes misunderstood component of monetary modernization.
AI is unlikely to become “money.”
Its significance lies in operating the infrastructure around money.
Potential applications include:
fraud detection;
anti-money-laundering analysis;
liquidity forecasting;
credit-risk analysis;
market surveillance;
regulatory compliance;
payment routing;
cybersecurity monitoring;
and automated treasury management.
When AI systems interact with programmable financial assets, a new class of machine-executable financial activity becomes possible.
For example, a corporate treasury system could theoretically:
identify excess liquidity;
evaluate eligible short-term assets;
exchange deposits for tokenized securities;
post collateral;
rebalance foreign-exchange exposure;
satisfy regulatory parameters;
and settle transactions automatically.
This does not eliminate financial institutions.
It changes the division of labor between human discretion, institutional rules, and software execution.
15. Monetary Policy in a Programmable Financial System
Digital monetary infrastructure may affect central-bank policy through several channels.
15.1 Faster Transmission
Instant settlement could allow policy-rate changes to propagate more quickly through short-term markets.
15.2 Greater Observability
Near-real-time financial data could provide central banks with improved information about liquidity conditions.
15.3 Deposit Competition
CBDCs, tokenized money-market instruments, and stablecoins could make movement out of bank deposits easier.
Banks may consequently need to compete more aggressively for funding.
15.4 Faster Financial Runs
The same technology making payments efficient can make financial instability faster.
A bank run that historically required physical withdrawals may occur through instantaneous electronic transfers.
15.5 More Direct Policy Instruments
A retail CBDC could theoretically allow remuneration rules to interact more directly with households.
However, substantial political, privacy, financial-stability, and institutional concerns make highly interventionist designs uncertain.
The more plausible near-term development is therefore digitalization of settlement and wholesale monetary infrastructure rather than radical direct central-bank management of household money.
16. The Emerging Architecture: Five Structural Layers
Evidence from central-bank experiments, payment-system reforms, financial markets, and academic research suggests that the future system may develop into five interconnected layers.
Layer A: Sovereign Units of Account
The dollar, euro, renminbi, yen, pound, and other national currencies are likely to remain the basic monetary units.
Cryptographic technology does not remove the network effects generated by taxation, wages, contracts, and domestic prices.
Layer B: Digital Central-Bank Settlement
Wholesale central-bank money becomes increasingly compatible with programmable financial infrastructure.
This may appear as wholesale CBDCs, tokenized reserves, or upgraded conventional real-time settlement systems.
Layer C: Competitive Private Money
Commercial-bank deposits remain central but increasingly coexist with:
tokenized deposits;
regulated stablecoins;
electronic-money liabilities;
and tokenized money-market instruments.
Layer D: Tokenized Financial Markets
Bonds, funds, securities, collateral, and eventually some real assets increasingly operate on programmable platforms.
Layer E: Interoperability Networks
Instead of one global blockchain, bridges connect:
banking systems;
instant-payment networks;
tokenized platforms;
CBDC systems;
stablecoin networks;
and securities infrastructures.
This architecture resembles an internet of regulated financial networks more than a single universal ledger.
17. Most Plausible Outcome for the Global Monetary System
The evidence supports several conclusions about the next 10–25 years.
17.1 Fiat Currency Is Unlikely to Disappear
The strongest monetary network effects originate from units of account, taxation, credit contracts, sovereign balance sheets, and regulated financial institutions.
Technology alters the representation and transmission of monetary claims more readily than it replaces the unit in which economic life is denominated.
17.2 Central Banks Are Likely to Remain the Monetary Anchor
The central-bank balance sheet provides final settlement and systemic liquidity during crises.
Even many tokenization proposals therefore place central-bank money at the center rather than eliminating it.
17.3 Commercial Banks Are Likely to Remain Major Money Creators
Wholesale CBDCs are more likely to modernize settlement than eliminate commercial banks.
Academic CBDC research also provides policymakers with strong incentives to avoid designs that cause abrupt deposit disintermediation.
17.4 Retail CBDCs Will Probably Develop Unevenly
Some countries will deploy them extensively.
Others may conclude that instant-payment systems, tokenized deposits, or regulated private payment providers already solve most retail-payment problems.
17.5 Wholesale Tokenization Is Likely to Advance Faster
Institutional securities markets have clearer incentives for:
atomic settlement;
collateral mobility;
automation;
synchronized payments;
and programmable compliance.
BIS CBDC survey evidence already shows more advanced work around wholesale than retail CBDCs.
17.6 Stablecoins Will Probably Become a Durable Financial Layer
Stablecoins are unlikely to replace sovereign currencies as units of account.
They may nevertheless become important instruments for:
cross-border payments;
digital-asset settlement;
global dollar access;
automated commerce;
and tokenized capital markets.
17.7 The Dollar Is More Likely to Experience Gradual Diversification Than Sudden Replacement
The reserve share of the dollar has declined compared with previous decades, but the currency remains dominant across multiple financial functions.
Its role in approximately 89% of FX trades demonstrates that reserve statistics alone substantially understate the depth of dollar network effects.
17.8 Global Monetary Architecture Will Become More Multipolar at the Margins
The euro, renminbi, regional payment systems, gold, smaller reserve currencies, and new digital infrastructures can all expand without producing a single successor to the dollar.
This suggests movement toward asymmetric multipolarity:
a dominant dollar-centered global system surrounded by increasingly important alternative currency and settlement networks.
18. Alternative Scenarios
Three broad outcomes deserve consideration.
Scenario I: Digitized Continuity
Existing institutions adopt tokenization and instant settlement while the fundamental hierarchy of money changes relatively little.
Central banks remain settlement anchors.
Commercial banks dominate deposit creation.
The dollar remains the primary international currency.
This scenario currently has the strongest institutional support.
Scenario II: Monetary Bloc Fragmentation
Geopolitical tensions produce increasingly distinct regional infrastructures.
Different currency zones construct partially independent payment, settlement, and reserve networks.
Global interoperability declines.
This outcome is technologically possible but economically costly because liquidity becomes divided among networks.
Scenario III: Private Digital Dollarization
Dollar stablecoins spread rapidly outside the United States, particularly in economies with unstable domestic currencies or expensive banking systems.
Paradoxically, a decentralized technological infrastructure could therefore strengthen dollar use internationally.
The IMF has highlighted both efficiency benefits and macro-financial risks associated with this possibility, particularly for emerging-market economies.
The real future will probably combine features of all three.
19. Principal Risks
Financial Disintermediation
Movement from bank deposits into CBDCs, stablecoins, tokenized funds, or securities may alter traditional bank funding.
Digital Bank Runs
Instantaneous transfers can accelerate liquidity crises.
Cybersecurity
As financial infrastructure becomes more interconnected, operational vulnerabilities may become systemic.
Infrastructure Concentration
A small number of technology providers, cloud firms, stablecoin issuers, or settlement platforms could become critical nodes.
Fragmentation
Multiple incompatible tokenized systems may reproduce the same inefficiencies they are designed to eliminate.
Privacy
Highly granular payment data can generate significant surveillance and governance concerns.
Monetary Substitution
Easy access to foreign digital currencies may weaken monetary sovereignty in economies with weaker currencies.
Capital-Flow Volatility
Digital rails could allow cross-border flows to react more rapidly to changes in interest rates, risk sentiment, or geopolitical shocks.
Smart-Contract Risk
Automated execution reduces some human operational errors while introducing software vulnerabilities and model risk.
The overall lesson is that efficiency and stability are not the same objective.
Technology can improve one while worsening the other.
20. Central Analytical Conclusion
The transformation of the global monetary system should not primarily be understood as a competition between “traditional money” and “cryptocurrency.”
The more consequential contest concerns the architecture supporting money itself.
The historical progression can be summarized as:
Gold-linked money
↓
Bretton Woods dollar-gold system
↓
Fiat currencies and floating exchange rates
↓
Electronic banking and global capital markets
↓
Balance-sheet-intensive central banking
↓
Instant digital payments
↓
Tokenized and programmable finance
↓
Interoperable monetary networks
At every major stage, the monetary system has combined new technology with existing institutions rather than simply replacing one regime overnight.
The same pattern is likely to characterize the coming transition.
Distributed ledgers, tokenization, CBDCs, stablecoins, artificial intelligence, and instant-payment networks will change how monetary claims function. But credibility, legal enforceability, safe assets, liquidity, monetary policy, fiscal capacity, and central-bank settlement remain critical.
The deepest transformation is therefore infrastructural rather than merely monetary.
21. Conclusion
The global monetary system is not approaching the end of sovereign money. It is entering a period in which sovereign money, private money, financial assets, and digital networks become increasingly programmable and interconnected.
The probable architecture of the next several decades can be described as a hybrid sovereign-digital monetary system.
Central banks will likely preserve control over settlement assets and monetary policy.
Commercial banks will continue creating much of the money used in the economy.
Stablecoins and tokenized deposits will create additional competitive forms of private digital money.
Wholesale CBDCs or tokenized central-bank reserves will modernize institutional settlement.
Tokenized financial assets will allow payment and asset transfer to become increasingly simultaneous.
Artificial intelligence will automate portions of liquidity management, compliance, risk management, and financial intermediation.
Cross-border transactions will increasingly move across interoperable networks rather than through a single global payment architecture.
The international currency system itself will probably become somewhat more diversified while remaining structurally centered on the U.S. dollar for the foreseeable analytical horizon.
The dollar's dominance derives from an ecosystem of trade invoicing, deep capital markets, dollar credit, safe assets, derivatives, FX liquidity, and institutional network effects—not simply from the technology used to transfer dollars.
Thus, the principal monetary transformation of the twenty-first century may not be the invention of a new currency.
It may instead be the creation of a new operating system for money.
In that system, monetary claims become increasingly programmable, settlement approaches real time, financial assets become interoperable, and borders between payments, banking, securities, and software gradually weaken.
The unresolved question is therefore not whether finance becomes digital.
It already has.
The decisive questions are which institutions define the rules of digital settlement, which forms of money retain par convertibility, which networks achieve global scale, which assets provide the ultimate collateral, and which monetary authorities retain the trust necessary to anchor the system.
Those variables—not technology alone—will determine the future structure of global monetary power.
Selected References
Aldasoro, I., Cornelli, G., Ferrari Minesso, M., Gambacorta, L., & Habib, M. M. (2025).
Stablecoins, money market funds and monetary policy. Economics Letters, 247, 112203.
Bank for International Settlements. (2019). Unconventional monetary policy tools: A cross-country analysis. Committee on the Global Financial System.
Bank for International Settlements. (2023). Blueprint for the future monetary system: Improving the old, enabling the new. Annual Economic Report 2023.
Bank for International Settlements. (2024). Nexus: Enabling instant cross-border payments. BIS Innovation Hub.
Bank for International Settlements. (2025). The next-generation monetary and financial system. Annual Economic Report 2025.
Illes, A., Kosse, A., & Wierts, P. (2025). Advancing in tandem: Results of the 2024 BIS survey on central bank digital currencies and crypto. BIS Papers No. 159.
Gopinath, G., Boz, E., Casas, C., Díez, F. J., Gourinchas, P.-O., & Plagborg-Møller, M. (2020). Dominant currency paradigm. American Economic Review, 110(3), 677–719.
International Monetary Fund. (2024). Digital money, cross-border payments, international reserves, and the global financial safety net: Preliminary considerations.
IMF Notes 2024/001.
International Monetary Fund. (2026). Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves: World aggregates, first quarter of 2026.
Keister, T., & Sanches, D. (2023). Should central banks issue digital currency? Review of Economic Studies, 90(1), 404–431.
Rey, H. (2013). Dilemma not trilemma: The global financial cycle and monetary policy independence. Proceedings of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Policy Symposium, 285–333.
Schilling, L., Fernández-Villaverde, J., & Uhlig, H. (2024). Central bank digital currency: When price and bank stability collide. Journal of Monetary Economics, 145, 103554.
Financial Stability Board. (2025). G20 Roadmap for Cross-border Payments: Consolidated progress report for 2025.
Comments