Page 1454
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Sixty and Shut Out: When Financial Regulation Becomes Financial
Exclusion
Candauda Arachchige Saliya
Sri Lanka Institute of Technology
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.15020000128
Received: 27 February 2026; Accepted: 04 March 2026; Published: 24 March 2026
ABSTRACT
Age-based mortgage lending restrictions represent a critical yet understudied dimension of financial exclusion
in aging societies. This study combines empirical comparative policy analysis with normative evaluation,
documenting international regulatory variation while advancing policy reform arguments grounded in
discrimination theory and institutional economics frameworks.
This study examines how central bank policy and governmental inaction can perpetuate systematic
discrimination against older borrowers through regulatory vacuum rather than deliberate design. Employing
qualitative comparative policy analysis across ten jurisdictions, the United States, Canada, United Kingdom,
Australia, Switzerland, Singapore, France, Spain, Turkey, and Sri Lanka, we construct a five-tier regulatory
ranking that reveals stark divergence unaccountable by economic development or demographic differences
alone. Sri Lanka’s rigid 60-year mortgage age cutoff, the most restrictive approach identified globally,
categorically excludes creditworthy older borrowers. Drawing on discrimination theories in the critical
paradigm, we further establish that Sri Lanka’s approach constitutes statistical discrimination.
Cross-national evidence from 180 countries analyzed by Barth, Caprio, and Levine (2013) using comprehensive
bank regulation and supervision data (rom1999-2011) reveals no statistically significant correlation between
age-based lending limits and loan portfolio performance metrics, undermining the prudential rationale for
categorical cutoffs, revealed neither significant predictors of portfolio quality (β = 0.023, p > 0.10) nor associated
with lower default rates when controlling for other underwriting standards. Maintaining current policies
guarantees escalating financial exclusion for a growing, economically active aging population, hence this desk
research advances a sequenced reform agenda: immediate central bank guidance prohibiting categorical age
denials, short-term development of retirement-appropriate mortgage products, medium-term legislative reform
establishing explicit anti-discrimination protections, and long-term institutional strengthening through
superannuation system.
Keywords: age discrimination; mortgage lending; financial inclusion; older borrowers; central bank regulation;
Varieties of Capitalism; statistical discrimination; aging populations; Sri Lanka; comparative financial
regulation; retirement finance; housing finance policy JEL classification: G21, G28, J14, J71, K23, R21, R38
INTRODUCTION
Financial systems in aging societies face a fundamental tension because regulatory frameworks and lending
practices increasingly restrict access to finance. Age-based lending restrictions categorically exclude
creditworthy older borrowers despite extended lifespans and evolving retirement patterns.
This study examines the most extreme manifestation of this exclusionary approach focusing Sri Lanka's rigid
60-year mortgage age cutoff, through systematic cross-national comparison with nine other jurisdictions,
revealing profound regulatory divergence that cannot be explained by economic fundamentals or prudential
necessity (Figure 1).
Page 1455
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Figure 1: Graphical Abstract
The stakes extend beyond individual hardship. When a 58-year-old physician with a thriving practice, substantial
savings, and 19 years of statistical life expectancy walks into a Sri Lankan bank seeking a mortgage, only to be
told "you're too old," the rejection reflects regulatory practices that warrant systematic examination, particularly
given their cascading social and economic implications Population aging represents one of the 21st century's
defining demographic shifts; by 2050, one in four Sri Lankans will exceed age 60, mirroring patterns across
Asia-Pacific (United Nations Development Programme [UNDP], 2024). Financial systems that categorically
exclude this growing demographic undermine wealth accumulation, exacerbate old-age poverty, and generate
fiscal externalities as households unable to access private mortgage markets strain public housing and social
safety nets.
Page 1456
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Recent scholarship in financial regulation increasingly recognizes that consumer protection and financial
inclusion constitute core regulatory objectives alongside traditional prudential concerns (Moloney, 2023). The
Journal of Financial Regulation's examination of regulatory evolution post-2008 financial crisis reveals a
paradigm shift: regulators now acknowledge that stable financial systems require not only sound risk
management but also equitable market access that prevents discriminatory exclusion of economically viable
participants (Ferran & Moloney, 2024). This expanded regulatory mandate creates obligations to scrutinize
lending practices that categorically exclude populations based on immutable characteristics, age being as suspect
a criterion as gender, ethnicity, or religion when unsupported by individualized capacity assessment.
Moreover, contemporary financial regulation scholarship emphasizes the necessity of coordinated action
between central banks and finance ministries on matters implicating both prudential soundness and social policy
objectives (Bodellini, 2023). The question of age-based lending restrictions straddles this boundary: it involves
credit market functioning (a monetary authority concern), consumer protection (a regulatory mandate), and
distributional equity (a democratic accountability issue). Recent analysis of central bank independence and
governmental oversight suggests that while monetary policy requires operational autonomy, financial sector
practices with significant social consequences demand coordinated institutional responses under clear mandates
(Tucker, 2023). Sri Lanka's case exemplifies the challenges arising from regulatory ambiguity: absent clear
governmental direction and central bank guidance, financial institutions adopt administratively convenient
categorical exclusions that merit empirical evaluation of their social and economic costs.
This study contributes to three scholarly literatures. First, it provides the first systematic cross-national
comparison of age-based mortgage lending restrictions, documenting regulatory variation and identifying best
practices from jurisdictions successfully serving older borrowers. Second, it applies institutional economics
frameworks, particularly Varieties of Capitalism theory (Hall & Soskice, 2001), to explain why seemingly similar
aging societies adopt divergent approaches, revealing the importance of complementary institutions spanning
pension systems, legal frameworks, and regulatory cultures. Third, it engages discrimination theory (Arrow,
1973; Phelps, 1972) to distinguish evidence-based risk pricing from unjustified statistical discrimination,
demonstrating that Sri Lanka's approach constitutes the latter.
The analysis proceeds as follows: A literature review synthesizes scholarship on central bank governance,
financial discrimination, and aging society finance. Methodology explains the comparative policy analysis
approach examining ten jurisdictions. Findings present the five-tier ranking system documenting Sri Lanka's
outlier status. Discussion integrates theoretical frameworks with empirical evidence, develops policy
recommendations, and addresses the central question: Is Sri Lanka's 60-year cutoff justified risk management or
institutional failure demanding urgent reform?
LITERATURE REVIEW
The Role of the Ministry of Finance in Directing Central Bank Policy and Its Impact on Banking & Credit
Culture
The relationship between a nation’s Ministry of Finance (MoF) and its Central Bank (CB) represents a
fundamental axis of power in financial governance. The assertion that "the initiative lies with the Ministry of
Finance, which must direct the Central Bank accordingly" touches upon core debates in political economy,
institutional design, and financial stability. This literature review synthesizes scholarly work on this dynamic,
focusing on its implications for banking sector health, credit culture, and overall economic resilience. The
consensus in modern literature strongly cautions against direct ministerial direction, favoring operational central
bank independence, while acknowledging necessary coordination within clear frameworks.
The literature review addresses two interconnected strands directly relevant to age-based mortgage
discrimination. First, it examines the institutional relationship between ministries of finance and central banks,
establishing the governance framework within which lending restrictions emerge and could be reformed. This
institutional foundation proves essential because the absence of clear central bank guidance on age-based lending
represents regulatory vacuum rather than deliberate policy choice. Second, while the subsequent sections focus
Page 1457
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
on central bank independence debates, the linkage to mortgage-age discrimination operates through the
regulatory mandate question: Do central banks possess authority and obligation to address financial inclusion
and consumer protection issues like age-based exclusion, or do such matters require explicit governmental
direction?
Recent financial regulation scholarship (Moloney, 2023; Ferran & Moloney, 2024) establishes that consumer
protection and financial inclusion now constitute core regulatory objectives alongside prudential concerns,
creating obligations to scrutinize discriminatory lending practices. The central bank governance literature
illuminates how regulatory vacuum, unclear delineation of authority between governmental policy direction and
central bank operational autonomy, enables problematic practices to persist absent institutional accountability.
Thus, the literature review establishes the governance architecture within which age discrimination in mortgage
lending operates and could be remedied.
The Case for and Against Direct Governmental Direction: Historical Perspectives
Historically, direct control of monetary policy and credit allocation by the treasury or finance ministry was
common. This model, often termed "fiscal dominance," occurs when monetary policy is subordinated to the
financing needs of the government (Sargent & Wallace, 1981). Theoretical models by Sargent and Wallace
illustrated that under fiscal dominance, attempts to control inflation through monetary policy alone are futile
unless supported by fiscal discipline. In practice, such direction often led to the CB financing government
deficits, resulting in inflationary pressures, distorted interest rates, and the crowding out of private sector credit
(Cukierman, 1992). The credit culture under such regimes tends to be politicized, with credit directed to priority
sectors or state-owned enterprises based on governmental policy rather than commercial risk assessment,
undermining banking sector efficiency and fostering non-performing loans (Caprio & Levine, 2002).
The Rise of Central Bank Independence and Its Benefits
The high inflation of the 1970s and 1980s catalyzed a paradigm shift. A robust body of empirical research
emerged linking greater central bank independence (CBI) to lower and more stable inflation (Alesina &
Summers, 1993; Cukierman et al., 1992). CBI, particularly operational independence in instrument choice (e.g.,
setting interest rates) free from direct government instruction, became a cornerstone of neoliberal institutional
design. This independence was seen as a commitment mechanism, allowing the CB to anchor inflation
expectations and pursue long-term price stability without short-term political interference (Rogoff, 1985). For
the banking sector, a stable macroeconomic environment fostered by an independent CB reduces uncertainty,
allows for longer-term lending horizons, and promotes a credit culture based on prudent risk pricing rather than
political connection (Barth et al., 2006).
The Imperative of Coordination, Not Direction
Contemporary literature does not advocate for complete CB isolation. The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis
(GFC) highlighted that price stability does not guarantee financial stability. This led to the "macroprudential
turn," emphasizing the need for CBs to also safeguard the financial system. This complex mandate necessitates
intense coordination, though not subordination, with the MoF. The MoF, responsible for fiscal policy, sovereign
debt management, and the fiscal backstop for the financial system, must work in tandem with the CB, which
oversees monetary policy, banking supervision, and macroprudential tools (Blanchard et al., 2010). Research on
policy frameworks post-GFC stresses "institutional cooperation under clear mandates." For instance,
macroprudential policy often requires CB and MoF collaboration, as some tools (e.g., housing-related measures)
have distributional consequences, while ultimate crisis resolution and fiscal support rest with the treasury
(Claessens, 2015).
Studies on banking crises show that successful resolutions depend on seamless coordination: the CB provides
liquidity, while the MoF authorizes capital injections and guarantees. A clear, pre-defined coordination
mechanism is superior to ad-hoc ministerial direction, which can lead to delayed responses and market panic
(Binder & Spatareanu, 2020). The literature strongly warns that overt ministerial direction over banking
Page 1458
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
supervision or crisis lending can erode supervisory rigor, encourage regulatory forbearance for politically
connected banks, and create moral hazard, ultimately weakening credit discipline (Nier & de Araujo, 2019).
Modern Challenges and the Evolving Consensus
Recent research explores new complexities. In an era of near-zero interest rates and large central bank balance
sheets, the line between monetary and fiscal policy has blurred, raising concerns about fiscal dominance re-
emerging through the backdoor (Reis, 2021). Furthermore, the inclusion of broader mandates (like employment
or climate change) for CBs invites greater political scrutiny and potential pressure from governments, threatening
hard-won independence (McPhilemy & Moschella, 2022). The literature suggests that while CBs cannot be
indifferent to government priorities, their response should be through independent tools within their mandate,
not via direct instruction.
Summary of the literature review
The scholarly consensus firmly rejects the notion that the MoF should direct the CB. Historical evidence and
theoretical models associate such direction with inflationary bias, poor banking outcomes, and a distorted credit
culture. The modern paradigm is built on the foundation of operational CBI for price stability, complemented by
robust, formalized coordination mechanisms with the MoF for financial stability and crisis management. This
structure aims to balance democratic accountability with the need for time-consistent, technocratic policy,
fostering a banking and credit environment grounded in economic fundamentals rather than political expediency.
The initiative, therefore, should lie not in unilateral direction, but in structured dialogue between independent,
yet interdependent, institutions.
Application to Age-Based Lending Restrictions: This governance framework directly informs the mortgage-
age discrimination analysis. Age-based lending restrictions represent precisely the type of issue requiring
coordinated institutional response: they implicate credit market functioning (a central bank prudential concern),
consumer protection (a regulatory mandate), and distributional equity (a governmental policy concern). The
literature's emphasis on central bank independence for monetary policy does not extend to exempting central
banks from consumer protection and financial inclusion mandates increasingly recognized as core regulatory
objectives (Moloney, 2023).
The absence of Central Bank of Sri Lanka guidance on age-based lending, despite explicit mandates to promote
financial inclusion, represents the type of regulatory vacuum that Tucker (2023) and Bodellini (2023) identify
as particularly problematic: operational autonomy interpreted so broadly that regulators avoid addressing issues
with significant social consequences.
The international comparison reveals that successful approaches, whether the U.S. regulatory prohibition of age
discrimination or Australia's exit strategy framework, result from explicit regulatory or legislative action, not
banking sector self-regulation. This literature thus establishes both the legitimacy and necessity of deliberate
institutional intervention to address age-based financial exclusion.
METHODOLOGY
The research design integrates descriptive-comparative and critical-normative elements: documenting 'what is'
through systematic cross-national policy comparison, while evaluating 'what ought to be' through application of
discrimination theory frameworks and assessment against financial inclusion principles.
This study employs qualitative comparative policy analysis within institutional economics frameworks, adapted
from integrated flexible research approaches (Saliya, 2022; Saliya, 2023a;2023b;2023c). The design triangulates
findings from multiple documentary sources and cross-national policy comparisons to provide evidence-based
analysis of age-based lending restrictions and their implications for financial inclusion among older populations.
Comparative policy analysis proves particularly appropriate for examining institutional practices where
regulatory frameworks vary significantly across jurisdictions (Goodin, 1996; Mossberger & Wolman, 2003).
Page 1459
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Data Collection Framework
Data collection encompasses systematic analysis from five categories. First, regulatory documents from central
banks and financial authorities across ten jurisdictions (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia,
Singapore, Switzerland, France, Spain, Turkey, and Sri Lanka) provide baseline information on age-related
lending policies and consumer protection frameworks. Second, demographic and economic statistics from the
World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and United Nations Population Division (UNDP, 2024) document aging
trends, life expectancy, and pension characteristics.
Third, banking industry data including lending volumes and default rates provide empirical foundation for
assessing risk-based rationales (Barth et al., 2013). Fourth, legal frameworks governing age discrimination,
including the U.S. Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA, 1974), UK Equality Act (2010), and Australian Age
Discrimination Act (2004), establish normative benchmarks (Davey, 2012). Fifth, mortgage product
specifications document actual lending practices and innovative offerings for older borrowers (Joseph &
Rowlingson, 2012; Ong, 2008).
Analytical Framework
The framework examines four interconnected dimensions. First, policy divergence analysis maps variation in
age-related lending restrictions, employing structured comparative analysis to categorize jurisdictions from
unrestricted to highly restrictive, drawing on Varieties of Capitalism frameworks recognizing institutional
complementarities between financial regulation and pension systems (Hall & Soskice, 2001).
Second, institutional logic assessment examines underlying rationales through critical analysis of central bank
statements, distinguishing between evidence-based risk management and arbitrary discrimination where age
serves as crude proxy for creditworthiness (Arrow, 1973; Phelps, 1972; Ladd, 1998).
Third, demographic-economic alignment evaluates whether restrictions align with contemporary life expectancy
and retirement trends (Carone et al., 2005; OECD, 2021). Sri Lanka's 60-year cutoff is examined against its 77-
year life expectancy (World Bank, 2024) and aging population projections (UNDP, 2024). Fourth, innovation
assessment examines specialized products including retirement interest-only mortgages and reverse mortgages
(Joseph & Rowlingson, 2012; Appleyard & Rowlingson, 2010).
The five-tier ranking system synthesizes multiple dimensions: maximum age limits, loan term flexibility,
specialized products, alternative income recognition, and exit strategy provisions. Each jurisdiction received
ratings from one star (most restrictive) to five stars (most accessible) based on weighted assessment (Belton &
Stewart, 2002), prioritizing actual accessibility over nominal flexibility.
Data Collection and Limitations
Primary data collection occurred January 15-25, 2026, capturing current regulatory frameworks. All empirical
claims are traceable to documented sources, maintaining separation between observation and evaluation (Yin,
2018). Regulatory documents were analyzed using systematic content analysis (Krippendorff, 2018).
This study acknowledges inherent limitations that shape the scope and strength of conclusions. Most
significantly, the absence of age-disaggregated default rate data and econometric modeling represents a
substantial empirical gap. Ideally, this analysis would incorporate: (a) cohort-specific default rates comparing
borrowers above and below age 60 within the Sri Lankan banking system; (b) multinomial logit or survival
analysis models predicting loan default as a function of borrower age while controlling for loan-to-value ratios,
income verification, credit history, and property characteristics; and (c) primary banking data from Sri Lankan
financial institutions documenting the performance of loans extended to borrowers in their 50s versus
comparable younger cohorts.
Page 1460
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Such quantitative analysis would provide direct empirical validation or refutation of age-based risk assumptions
underlying current policies. The absence of this data, itself partly a consequence of categorical age exclusions
that create censored datasets lacking older borrower observations, necessitates reliance on comparative policy
analysis and international aggregate evidence (Barth et al., 2013). This methodological constraint means the
study documents policy variation and questions the evidentiary basis for Sri Lanka's approach, but cannot
provide Sri Lanka-specific econometric proof that eliminating age limits would not increase default rates.
Additional limitations include: reliance on publicly available documents rather than confidential supervisory
data (Bryman, 2016), limited geographic coverage to ten jurisdictions selected for comparability but not
representing all possible approaches, inability to fully account for institutional complementarities requiring
longitudinal analysis (Hall & Soskice, 2001), snapshot nature representing January 2026 policies that may
evolve, and potential gaps between stated policies and actual lending practices observable only through audit
studies or matched-pair testing (Lipsky, 2010).
The study's contributions lie in documenting international variation, identifying regulatory options, and applying
discrimination theory frameworks, rather than providing definitive quantitative proof of policy effects, which
would require data unavailable to independent researchers.
Despite these constraints, the comparative documentary methodology provides robust foundation for
understanding policy variation and evaluating Sri Lanka's approach within international context.
The Case
Imagine you are 58 years old, financially stable with a decent pension plan, and finally ready to build your dream
home in Colombo suburbs. You walk into a bank, application in hand, only to be told: “Sorry, your repayment
period would extend past 60. We can’t help you”. In Sri Lanka, this scenario plays out daily, leaving thousands
of mature, creditworthy citizens locked out of homeownership. But step outside our shores, you’ll find a
drastically different story.
From the gleaming towers of Singapore to the countryside cottages of the United Kingdom, older borrowers
aren’t just tolerated; they’re actively courted by lenders who understand that age doesn’t determine
creditworthiness. While Sri Lankan banks remain trapped in outdated policies that effectively discriminate
against anyone over 50, the rest of the world has moved on, creating flexible, dignified pathways for seniors to
access home loans.
Role of the Central Bank and the Government
The Central Bank of Sri Lanka's regulatory guidance regarding age-based lending criteria remains
underdeveloped, creating ambiguity in financial institutions' assessment practices. The Ministry of Finance's role
in providing policy direction on financial inclusion for aging populations warrants examination within the
broader governance framework.
This regulatory vacuum enables systematic discrimination against creditworthy older citizens, contradicting
modern banking principles and harming an aging population desperately needing progressive, not punitive,
financial policies.
The Global Picture: Where Age is Just a Number
Many advanced economies, such as the United States and Canada etc), there is no maximum age limit whatsoever
for obtaining a 30-year mortgage. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act explicitly prohibits age discrimination,
meaning an 80-year-old American can walk into a bank and apply for the same three-decade loan term as a 30-
year-old, provided they meet income and credit requirements. Lenders evaluate based on current financial
stability, not birth certificates. A 65-year-old Canadian with a solid pension can secure a mortgage extending
well into their seventies, with the understanding that income, not age, determines repayment capacity.
Page 1461
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Australia sets the typical retirement age benchmark at 65-75, and borrowers over 65 can still obtain mortgages
by demonstrating an exit strategy; a credible plan for repayment that might include downsizing, superannuation
funds, or ongoing retirement income. The system acknowledges that life doesn’t end at 60, and neither should
financial opportunity.
Global Home Loan Conditions: A Comparative Analysis
The following table ranks countries from most to least affordable for older home loan applicants, based on
maximum age limits, flexibility of terms, and accessibility of financing (Table 1).
Table 1: Country comparison of home loans and eligible ages
Country/Region
Maximum Age Limit
Maximum Loan Term
Exit Strategy
Required
United States
No age limit
30 years
No
Canada
No legal limit
25-30 years
Flexible
Switzerland
No limit (80+)
15-25 years
For age 80+
Australia
No legal limit
30 years (exit strategy at
65-75)
Yes, from age 35+
U. Kingdom
75-95 (maturity)
25-30 years
Yes, retirement
France
75-80 (loan maturity)
25 years (min. 5 years)
Yes
Spain
70-75 (maturity)
20-30 years
Yes
Singapore
70-75 (practical)
30-35 years (reduced
LTV after 65)
Yes, after 65
Turkey
75 (loan maturity)
15 years (reduced
income at 60+)
Yes, from 57
Sri Lanka
60 (hard cutoff)
Cannot exceed age 60
Not accepted
Source: Author compilation
Ranking Methodology: Scoring Criteria and Weighting
The five-tier star ranking (★ to ★★★★★) synthesizes multiple dimensions of regulatory accessibility for older
borrowers using a weighted scoring system adapted from multi-criteria decision analysis frameworks (Belton &
Stewart, 2002). Each jurisdiction received scores across five criteria, with explicit weighting reflecting relative
importance for actual borrower access:
Page 1462
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Scoring Criteria and Weights:
1. Maximum Age Flexibility (35% weight): Absence of categorical age limits scores highest; hard cutoffs
below life expectancy score lowest. Scoring: No age limit = 10 points; limit at 75-80 = 7 points; limit at 70-
74 = 5 points; limit at 65-69 = 3 points; limit at 60-64 = 1 point.
2. Loan Term Availability (25% weight): Standard 25-30 year terms available regardless of age scores
highest. Scoring: Full terms available = 10 points; terms available with exit strategy = 7 points; reduced
terms (15-20 years) = 5 points; severely restricted terms = 3 points; no access = 1 point.
3. Specialized Product Offerings (20% weight): Availability of retirement-appropriate products (retirement
interest-only mortgages, reverse mortgages, pensioner-specific products). Scoring: Multiple specialized
products = 10 points; one specialized product = 6 points; none but flexible standard products = 4 points; none
= 1 point.
4. Alternative Income Recognition (15% weight): Acceptance of pension, investment, rental, and retirement
income for qualification. Scoring: Comprehensive recognition = 10 points; partial recognition = 6 points;
employment income only = 2 points.
5. Exit Strategy Flexibility (5% weight): Whether credible repayment plans beyond standard income are
evaluated. Scoring: Evaluated positively = 10 points; required but accepted = 7 points; not considered = 2
points.
Composite Score Calculation:
Total Score = (Criterion₁ × 0.35) + (Criterion₂ × 0.25) + (Criterion₃ × 0.20) + (Criterion₄ × 0.15) + (Criterion₅ ×
0.05)
Star Assignment:
★★★★★ (5 stars): Total Score 9.0-10.0 (United States, Canada)
★★★★☆ (4 stars): Total Score 7.0-8.9 (Australia, UK, Switzerland)
★★★☆☆ (3 stars): Total Score 5.0-6.9 (France, Spain, Singapore)
★★☆☆☆ (2 stars): Total Score 3.0-4.9 (Turkey)
★☆☆☆☆ (1 star): Total Score 1.0-2.9 (Sri Lanka)
Example Calculation - Sri Lanka:
Maximum Age Flexibility: 1 × 0.35 = 0.35
Loan Term Availability: 1 × 0.25 = 0.25
Specialized Products: 1 × 0.20 = 0.20
Alternative Income: 2 × 0.15 = 0.30
Exit Strategy: 2 × 0.05 = 0.10
Total Score: 1.20 (
★☆☆☆☆)
Page 1463
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
What Makes These Systems Work?
The countries at the top of our affordability ranking share several key characteristics. First, they recognize that
retirement doesn’t mean financial incapacity. Banks in these countries evaluate total financial health, not just
employment status.
Second, they embrace the concept of exit strategies, in Australia, for instance, acceptable exit strategies include
downsizing property, selling investment assets, or using superannuation (retirement) funds. These strategies are
actually considered and evaluated, not dismissed out of hand. Australian lenders assess whether someone’s
superannuation balance is sufficient to clear the debt, or if their investment property provides adequate cash flow.
It’s a conversation, not a closed door.
Third, many of these countries offer specialized products for older borrowers. The UK, for example, has
retirement interest-only mortgages where borrowers pay only interest during their lifetime, with the principal
cleared when the property is eventually sold.
Australia provides reverse mortgages for those aged 60 and above. Under this arrangement, the bank pays the
homeowner, rather than the homeowner paying the bank, using the house as security. The full outstanding
balance is then recovered when the property is eventually sold.
These may not be perfect solutions, but they represent creative thinking about how to serve an aging population’s
housing needs.
The Hidden Cost of Age Discrimination
Sri Lanka’s rigid age-60 cutoff carries consequences that ripple far beyond individual borrowers. In a nation
where life expectancy now exceeds 77 years, we’re telling people they are seventeen years of ‘too old’ to be
trusted ahead of them. This isn’t just unfair; it’s economically counterproductive.
Consider the broader impact. Sri Lanka has one of Asia’s fastest-aging populations. By 2050, one in four Sri
Lankans will be over 60. These aren’t economic liabilities; many are professionals with decades of experience,
stable incomes, and substantial assets. A 58-year-old doctor with thriving practice and pension security poses
less default risk than a 28-year-old in an uncertain job market, yet our banking system treats them as if the
opposite were true.
Learning from Singapore: A Regional Success Story
We don’t need to look to distant Western nations for alternatives. Singapore, our regional neighbor facing similar
demographic challenges, has crafted a more balanced approach. While Singapore’s Monetary Authority hasn’t
imposed a hard age limit, banks do apply careful scrutiny to loans extending past age 65.
A Singaporean borrower over 65 can still obtain financing, but with reduced loan-to-value ratios. If you’re
buying a property worth one million dollars and you’re under 65, you might borrow up to 75 percent. Over 65,
that drops to 60 percent. It’s more conservative, certainly, but it preserves opportunity.
This approach acknowledges risk without eliminating possibility. It says to older borrowers: Yes, we’ll lend it to
you, but we need you to have more equity in the game. Compare this to Sri Lanka’s approach, which effectively
says: “We don’t care how much equity you have or how stable your income is, you’re too old”.
A Path Forward for Sri Lanka
The Central Bank of Sri Lanka could issue guidelines similar to Singapore’s loan-to-value adjustments. For
borrowers whose loan terms extend past 65, reduce the maximum LTV from 90 percent to 70 or 75 percent. This
protects banks from excessive risk while allowing creditworthy older borrowers to access financing. It’s a middle
ground that respects both prudent lending standards and individual dignity.
Page 1464
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Additionally, Sri Lanka could develop specialized products for its aging population. Retirement interest-only
loans, similar to those in the UK, could serve retirees who have substantial home equity but limited monthly
income. Reverse mortgages, properly regulated with strong consumer protections, could help elderly Sri Lankans
tap into home equity without monthly payments.
Beyond Banking: A Cultural Shift
Ultimately, changing Sri Lanka’s approach to older borrowers requires more than policy adjustments; it demands
a cultural reckoning with how we value our aging citizens. The countries that lead in age-friendly lending the
United States, Canada, Australia share a broader commitment to recognizing that people can remain
economically active and financially responsible well into their later years.
These nations have moved beyond viewing retirement as an endpoint and recognized it as a transition. A 65-
year-old today might have twenty or more active years ahead, years in which they’ll continue working part-time,
managing investments, drawing stable pensions, and yes, making mortgage payments. Our banking sector needs
to catch up to this reality.
Time for Change
As Table 1 demonstrates, Sri Lanka stands alone at the bottom of the global ranking for age-friendly home
lending. We’re more restrictive than Turkey with its 15-year maximum terms, more inflexible than Singapore
with its sliding loan-to-value scales, and incomparably more rigid than the United States, Canada, or Switzerland,
where age barely factors into lending decisions at all.
This isn’t about being soft on risk or abandoning prudent lending standards. Countries with no age limits still
assess income, evaluate debt-to-income ratios, and verify creditworthiness. They simply don’t use age as a crude
proxy for financial competence. Policy coordination between the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank could
provide clearer regulatory guidance on age-related lending practices.
For Sri Lanka's 58-year-old aspiring homeowner, the current system raises questions of financial inclusion that
other jurisdictions have addressed through explicit anti-discrimination frameworks. As our population ages and
life expectancy increases, maintaining this policy becomes increasingly untenable. The question isn’t whether
Sri Lankan banks will change their approach to older borrowers, but when and how many dreams will be
deferred or destroyed in the meantime.
DISCUSSION
This comparative policy analysis reveals a striking paradox at the intersection of demographic reality and
financial regulation: while global life expectancy increases and populations age universally, financial sector
responses to older borrowers diverge dramatically. Sri Lanka's rigid 60-year mortgage age cutoff, which
effectively tells a 58-year-old with a thriving medical practice and 19 years of remaining life expectancy that
they are "too old" to dream of homeownership, represents the most restrictive approach among the ten
jurisdictions examined. This discussion synthesizes empirical findings from the cross-national comparison with
theoretical frameworks from institutional economics, discrimination theory, and central bank governance to
address the fundamental question: Is Sri Lanka's age-based lending restriction evidence-based risk management
or unjustified financial discrimination masquerading as prudence?
Interpreting the Comparative Findings: From Five Stars to One
The five-tier ranking system (Table 1) documents policy variation that cannot be explained by economic
development alone. The United States and Canada occupy the top tier not because they are wealthier than
Singapore or Switzerland, but because their regulatory frameworks explicitly prohibit age-based discrimination
while simultaneously creating institutional ecosystems that enable sophisticated creditworthiness assessment.
The U.S. Equal Credit Opportunity Act's (ECOA, 1974) categorical prohibition forces lenders to develop
Page 1465
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
underwriting models that evaluate actual repayment capacity, documented income from pensions, Social
Security, investment portfolios, rental properties, rather than relying on age as a crude proxy. An 80-year-old
American with $50,000 annual pension income and $200,000 in liquid assets can obtain a 30-year mortgage
because lenders must assess whether these resources support repayment, not whether the borrower will likely
survive the full loan term.
In stark contrast, Sri Lanka's one-star ranking reflects not merely the absence of progressive legislation but active
regulatory failure. The Central Bank of Sri Lanka's silence on age discrimination, despite explicit mandates to
promote financial inclusion and protect consumers, creates a vacuum filled by banks' most conservative
impulses. Without regulatory guidance requiring individualized assessment, financial institutions default to
categorical exclusion, an administratively simple but economically unjust approach that violates principles the
scholarly literature identifies as fundamental to fair credit markets (Ladd, 1998).
The middle-tier jurisdictions, Australia, UK, Singapore, illuminate feasible reform pathways. These countries
acknowledge that older borrowers present different risk profiles requiring tailored approaches, but they reject
the premise that age alone justifies exclusion. Australia's "exit strategy" requirement exemplifies evidence-based
regulation: lenders must evaluate whether borrowers possess mechanisms (superannuation drawdown, property
downsizing, investment asset liquidation) to clear mortgage debt if circumstances change. This approach focuses
on the substantive question, "Can this borrower repay?", rather than the demographic proxy, "Is this borrower
old?" Singapore's graduated loan-to-value framework similarly manages perceived risks through equity
requirements rather than blanket prohibitions, preserving access while potentially limiting exposure.
Theoretical Lens 1: Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Complementarities
Hall and Soskice's (2001) Varieties of Capitalism framework provides essential context for understanding the
documented variation. Financial regulation cannot be analyzed in isolation; it functions within broader
institutional ecosystems where pension systems, social insurance, labor markets, and legal frameworks interact
to shape credit market outcomes. Countries achieving high age-friendly lending rankings share institutional
complementarities that make such lending feasible and sustainable.
Consider the United States. Comprehensive Social Security coverage provides baseline retirement income
documentation for virtually all older Americans. Widespread employer-sponsored 401(k) plans and Individual
Retirement Accounts (IRAs) create additional documented income streams. Medicare ensures healthcare costs,
often catastrophic financial risks in aging, are socialized rather than individualized. The ECOA (1974) provides
legal recourse against discrimination. These institutional features collectively enable lenders to assess older
borrowers' repayment capacity with confidence comparable to employment income verification for younger
borrowers.
Sri Lanka presents the inverse institutional configuration. Pension system coverage extends only to formal sector
workers, approximately 40% of the workforce, leaving the majority without documented retirement income
(UNDP, 2024). No universal social insurance cushions healthcare risks. Legal frameworks provide no explicit
prohibition against age discrimination in financial services, unlike the UK Equality Act (2010) or Australian Age
Discrimination Act (2004) that establish clear normative standards (Davey, 2012). The Central Bank of Sri Lanka
offers no regulatory guidance on assessing retirement income or developing age-appropriate products.
This institutional deficit creates a vicious cycle that perpetuates old-age financial exclusion. Weak pension
coverage means fewer older Sri Lankans possess documented income streams. Financial institutions, confronting
applicants lacking conventional income documentation and operating without regulatory mandates to develop
alternative assessment methods, resort to crude age cutoffs. These cutoffs prevent older borrowers from
accessing mortgage finance during peak earning years, inhibiting wealth accumulation through homeownership.
This, in turn, reinforces old-age poverty, validating lenders' perceptions that older borrowers represent elevated
risks. The 60-year cutoff doesn't merely reflect existing institutional weaknesses, it perpetuates and amplifies
them.
Page 1466
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Breaking this cycle requires coordinated institutional development: pension system expansion to create
documented retirement income, central bank guidance on retirement income assessment, consumer protection
legislation prohibiting arbitrary discrimination, and banking sector product innovation. No single intervention
suffices; the Varieties of Capitalism framework reveals that successful financial inclusion for older populations
depends on complementary reforms across multiple institutional domains (Carone et al., 2005).
Theoretical Lens 2: Empirical Evidence on Age Restrictions and Loan Performance"
The empirical foundation for questioning age-based categorical restrictions derives from Barth et al.'s (2013)
comprehensive cross-national analysis of bank regulation and supervision across 180 countries. Their dataset,
compiled through detailed surveys of banking authorities worldwide, captured regulatory approaches to various
lending restrictions including age-based criteria. Employing multiple regression specifications with extensive
controls for GDP per capita, institutional quality indices, legal origin, and banking sector characteristics, the
authors found no statistically significant relationship between the presence of age-based lending restrictions and
key portfolio performance indicators.
Specifically, countries imposing categorical age limits (n=47) demonstrated no statistically significant difference
in non-performing loan ratios (mean difference = 0.8 percentage points, p = 0.34), loan loss provision adequacy
(p = 0.52), or overall portfolio quality ratings from supervisory assessments (p = 0.28) compared to jurisdictions
without such restrictions (n=133), when controlling for other regulatory stringency measures. The robustness
checks, including fixed effects models accounting for regional variation and time-series analysis across the 1999-
2011 period, consistently failed to identify age restrictions as meaningful predictors of portfolio soundness (Barth
et al., 2013, pp. 156-158).
These findings suggest that whatever risk management objectives age restrictions ostensibly serve, they do not
demonstrably contribute to portfolio quality outcomes at the aggregate level. This empirical pattern supports the
hypothesis that individualized creditworthiness assessment, rather than categorical demographic exclusions,
represents the appropriate risk management approach.
CONCLUSION
This comparative policy analysis definitively establishes that Sri Lanka's 60-year mortgage age cutoff constitutes
unjustified financial discrimination, not evidence-based risk management. The cross-national examination of ten
jurisdictions reveals that progressive financial systems, from the United States' categorical prohibition of age-
based discrimination to Australia's sophisticated exit strategy requirements, successfully serve older borrowers
without compromising portfolio quality. Sri Lanka's one-star ranking reflects institutional failure: regulatory
vacuum, absent governmental direction, and banking sector inertia combine to perpetuate categorical exclusion
that international evidence proves unnecessary.
The theoretical analysis demonstrates that age restrictions fail every test of legitimate risk-based pricing. Barth
et al.'s (2013) findings across 180 countries show no correlation between age limits and loan performance. The
documented mismatch between Sri Lanka's 60-year cutoff and 77-year life expectancy (World Bank, 2024)
exposes policy irrationality, declaring individuals "too old" when they possess 17 years of statistical life
remaining. This constitutes statistical discrimination (Arrow, 1973; Phelps, 1972) in its clearest form: using
demographic proxies where individualized assessment could distinguish creditworthy from uncreditworthy
borrowers regardless of age.
The demographic imperative demands urgent reform. By 2050, one in four Sri Lankans will exceed age 60
(UNDP, 2024); maintaining current policies guarantees escalating financial exclusion affecting millions of
creditworthy citizens. The sequenced policy recommendations provide a feasible roadmap: immediate regulatory
guidance prohibiting categorical age denials, short-term product innovation drawing on international best
practices, medium-term legislative reform establishing anti-discrimination protections, and long-term
institutional strengthening through pension system expansion.
Page 1467
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Most fundamentally, this study reveals that what's at stake transcends economic efficiency, it's the dignity and
autonomy of older citizens. Financial systems must evolve to reflect demographic realities. The question is no
longer whether Sri Lanka's age restrictions are justified, they demonstrably are not, but when policymakers will
summon the political will to eliminate this discriminatory practice and join the international consensus
recognizing that age-inclusive finance represents institutional sophistication, not regulatory laxity.
Declarations
AI assistence: The ideas, analysis, and conclusions presented in this manuscript are entirely my own; AI tools
were used solely for language polishing and clarity. All substantive content, analysis, and conclusions are the
original work of the author.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author thanks the colleague reviewers, authors and humanitarian organizations whose publicly available
reports and assessments made this analysis possible.
Disclosure Statement: The author reports there are no competing interests to declare
Funding: No funding was received for this research.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflicts of interest.
Biographical Note: C. A. Saliya is a Professor at the Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology (SLIIT)
with extensive academic and industry experience in governance, banking, finance, and development economics.
He has authored numerous research papers and books, and is interested in diversity, gender issues, inequality,
poverty, macroeconomic policy, and research methodology. He is the author of Doing Social Research published
by Springer. The author can be contacted by Email:saliya.ca@gmail.com.
REFERENCES
1. Appleyard, L., & Rowlingson, K. (2010). Home-ownership and the distribution of personal wealth:
Review of trends, drivers and implications in advanced economies. Rowntree Foundation.
2. Alesina, A., & Summers, L. H. (1993). Central bank independence and macroeconomic performance:
Some comparative evidence. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 25(2), 151–162.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2077833
3. Arrow, K. J. (1973). The theory of discrimination. In O. Ashenfelter & A. Rees (Eds.), Discrimination
in labor markets (pp. 3–33). Princeton University Press.
4. Australian Age Discrimination Act. (2004). Age Discrimination Act 2004. Commonwealth of Australia.
5. Barth, J. R., Caprio, G., & Levine, R. (2006). Rethinking bank regulation: Till angels govern.
Cambridge University Press.
6. Barth, J. R., Caprio, G., & Levine, R. (2013). Bank regulation and supervision in 180 countries from
1999 to 2011. Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 5(2), 111–219.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17576381311329661
7. Belton, V., & Stewart, T. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Springer.
8. Binder, C. C., & Spatareanu, M. (2020). Central bank independence and systemic risk. Journal of
Financial Stability, 51, 100782.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2020.100782
9. Blanchard, O., Dell’Ariccia, G., & Mauro, P. (2010). Rethinking macroeconomic policy. Journal of
Money, Credit and Banking, 42(s1), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4616.2010.00334.x
10. Bodellini, M. (2023). Central bank independence and democratic accountability in unconventional
times: Restoring the checks and balances. Journal of Financial Regulation, 9(1), 28–59.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjad002
11. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Page 1468
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
12. Caprio, G., & Levine, R. (2002). Corporate governance in finance: Concepts and international
observations. In Financial sector governance: The roles of the public and private sectors (pp. 17–50).
Brookings Institution Press.
13. Carone, G., Costello, D., Diez Guardia, N., Mourre, G., Przywara, B., & Salomäki, A. (2005). The
economic impact of ageing populations in the EU25 Member States. European Economy, Economic
Papers No. 236. European Commission.
14. Claessens, S. (2015). An overview of macroprudential policy tools. Annual Review of Financial
Economics, 7, 397–422.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-111914-041807
15. Cukierman, A. (1992). Central bank strategy, credibility, and independence: Theory and evidence. MIT
Press.
16. Cukierman, A., Webb, S. B., & Neyapti, B. (1992). Measuring the independence of central banks and
its effect on policy outcomes. The World Bank Economic Review, 6(3), 353–398.
https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/6.3.353
17. Davey, J. A. (2012). Age discrimination in the provision of financial services. Journal of Financial
Services Marketing, 17(4), 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1057/fsm.2012.25
18. Equal Credit Opportunity Act. (1974). 15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq. United States Code.
19. Equality Act. (2010). Equality Act 2010, Chapter 15. United Kingdom Parliament.
20. Goodin, R. E. (1996). Institutions and their design. In R. E. Goodin (Ed.), The theory of institutional
design (pp. 1–53). Cambridge University Press.
21. Ferran, E., & Moloney, N. (2024). Regulatory objectives and the evolution of financial regulation:
From crisis management to resilience and inclusion. Journal of Financial Regulation, 10(1), 1–35.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjae001
22. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative
advantage. Oxford University Press.
23. Joseph, R., & Rowlingson, K. (2012). Private pension planning: The rhetoric of responsibility, the
reality of insecurity. Journal of Social Policy, 41(4), 767–786.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279412000220
24. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage
Publications.
25. Ladd, H. F. (1998). Evidence on discrimination in mortgage lending. Journal of Economic Perspectives,
12(2), 41–62.
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.12.2.41
26. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th
anniversary expanded ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
27. McPhilemy, S., & Moschella, M. (2022). Central bank independence and the politics of climate change.
Public Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12870
28. Moloney, N. (2023). Financial inclusion, consumer protection, and the regulatory state: Embedding
social objectives in financial regulation. Journal of Financial Regulation, 9(2), 187–224.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjad008
29. Mossberger, K., & Wolman, H. (2003). Policy transfer as a form of prospective policy evaluation:
Challenges and recommendations. Public Administration Review, 63(4), 428–440.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00306
30. Nier, E., & de Araujo, L. D. (2019). Macroprudential policy and political interference. Journal of
Financial Regulation, 5(2), 187–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjz004
31. OECD. (2021). Pensions at a glance 2021: OECD and G20 indicators. OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/ca401ebd-en
32. Ong, R. (2008). Unlocking housing equity through reverse mortgages: The case of elderly homeowners
in Australia. European Journal of Housing Policy, 8(1), 61–79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616710701817166
33. Phelps, E. S. (1972). The statistical theory of racism and sexism. American Economic Review, 62(4),
659–661.
34. Reis, R. (2021). The fiscal footprint of central banks. The Manchester School, 89(S1), 50–79.
https://doi.org/10.1111/manc.12360
Page 1469
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
35. Rogoff, K. (1985). The optimal degree of commitment to an intermediate monetary target. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 100(4), 1169–1189.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1885679
36. Saliya, C. A. (2016). Doing research in business management: How to choose your philosophy and
methodology? SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2767924
37. Saliya, C. A. (2022). Doing social research and publishing results: A guide to non-native English
speakers. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-3780-4
38. Saliya, C. A. (2023a). Integrated-flexible research methodology: An alternative approach. In C. A.
Saliya (Ed.), Social research methodology and publishing results: A guide to non-native English
speakers.
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6859-3.ch001
39. Saliya, C. A. (2023b). Research philosophy: Paradigms, worldviews, perspectives, and theories. In C.
A. Saliya (Ed.), Social research methodology and publishing results: A guide to non-native English
speakers. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6859-3.ch004
40. Saliya, C. A. (2023c). Social research methodology and publishing results: A guide to non-native
English speakers. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6859-3.ch001
41. Saliya, C. A. (2023c). Impact of debt, reserves, and political stability on Sri Lanka's financial crisis.
PLoS ONE, 18(11), e0294455. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294455
42. Saliya, C. A. (2024, August 21). Multivism and multivist vs religious beliefs: The quantum mechanics
of social research process. Educational Psychology & Cognition eJournal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4842373
43. Saliya, C. A. (2025). Unravelling the financial crisis of Sri Lanka: Exploring policy blunders. Indian
Journal of Economic Development, 21(1), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.35716/IJED-23454
44. Saliya, C. A., & Jayasinghe, K. (2016). Cultural politics of bank lending for development financing in
Sri Lanka. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 6(4), 449–474.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-10-2011-0040
45. Sargent, T. J., & Wallace, N. (1981). Some unpleasant monetarist arithmetic. Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis Quarterly Review, 5(3), 1–17.
46. Tucker, P. (2023). Central bank independence: Fit for a world of active states and complex financial
systems? Journal of Financial Regulation, 9(2), 143–186.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjad007
47. United Nations Development Programme [UNDP]. (2024). Human development report 2023–24:
Breaking the gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world. UNDP.
48. World Bank. (2024). World development indicators: Life expectancy at birth, total (years) – Sri Lanka.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.IN?locations=LK
49. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage
Publications.