Progress in emerging markets is being put at risk

By Erik Berglof and Raghuram Rajan

Published: July 18 2008 03:00 | Last updated: July 18 2008 03:00

Finance ministers of the Group of Eight leading economies have commissioned a study on the role of financial market speculation in recent oil price rises. In India, the regulator recently suspended trade in futures markets for several commodities, blaming speculators for price rises. The global credit crisis has made the financial sector vulnerable to populist attacks. The greatest casualty may be financial development.

In developed countries there is a sober search under way for appropriate regulatory and supervisory responses to the lessons learnt from the crisis. But in poorer countries politicians are unwilling to leave regulation to the regulators. The problems in the financial sector in the US allow populists in emerging markets not just to retread their critiques of financial markets but also to hold free enterprise and trade guilty by association.

These critics have a point, although it is misdirected. The world is still struggling to understand how to regulate sophisticated financial systems, but it has learnt more about how to manage less sophisticated ones. As a result, the achievements of emerging market financial systems over the past decade have been impressive. Since the Asian and Russian crises, financial regulation and supervision, as well as corporate governance and transparency, have all improved. Governments have made tremendous advances in managing their finances, while central banks have charted more independent policy. These advances help explain why we have not so far seen more collateral damage in emerging markets.

Indeed, the correct response in emerging markets to the global crisis should be to accelerate reforms that strengthen the financial and regulatory infrastructure, while taking care to avoid, as far as possible, the misaligned incentives that lie at the root of the crisis. Instead, important reforms are being reversed. In India, politically motivated mass loan waivers, which ruined credit culture in the past, are reappearing. A recent European Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank survey showed deep distrust of many market institutions, including banks, and widespread nostalgia for the debilitating instruments of central planning in many countries of the former Soviet Union.

Many of the actions against the financial sector are proposed in the name of the poor, even though the true beneficiaries are the politicians themselves. Ironically, in much of the world the financial sector is at last reaching out to the poor, as improvements in technology and the growth in legal infrastructure promise new solutions to age-old problems. In Africa, banks and cell phone companies are drawing ever larger parts of the population into the payment system. Financial innovations such as crop insurance and micro-finance are promoting the diffusion of new seeds and fertilisers, and futures markets are facilitating hedging and price discovery. In India, a new law promises to aid the growth of grain warehouses and electronic warehouse receipts that will allow a farmer to store his harvest, and obtain finance against it, until he is ready to sell. It will probably do more for agricultural credit than years of state intervention.

In the industrialised economies of central and eastern Europe, which started their transformation into market economies essentially without financial systems, it took almost a decade for fragile banks truly to extend credit beyond the government, large companies and rich individuals. But now well-capitalised institutions, often backed by foreign parents, actively support restructuring of privatised enterprises, extend loans to risky small entrepreneurs and finance the mortgages of people wanting to buy their own homes. As a result of better financial access, in the Baltic states people trust their banks even more than their political and legal institutions.

All this progress may be at risk, especially if the global financial squeeze is longer and deeper than expected. Financial access will contract and with it the support for institutions and markets. Emerging markets will re-enact battles for their economic soul that we thought had been decided. It is important that industrial countries' governments do not fan the flames of antimarket sentiment by choosing the present time to reconsider their position on trade and capital flows. For the experience of previous crises suggests that the veneer of market institutions is thinner than we think.

Erik Berglof is chief economist of the EBRD. Raghuram Rajan is professor of finance at the Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago

国际 > 经济 > 评论
 
新兴市场金融不进则退
 
作者:埃里克•贝里勒夫(Erik Berglof)和拉古拉姆•瑞占(Raghuram Rajan)为英国《金融时报》撰稿
2008年7月21日 星期一
 

 

八国集团(G8)的财政部长们已经委托有关机构,对金融市场的投机行为在最近油价上涨中所发挥的作用进行研究。在印度,监管者最近暂停了期货市场上一些大宗商品的交易,指责投机者造成了价格上涨。全球信贷危机已经致使金融部门成为民粹主义者攻击的对象。最大的受害者或许是金融的发展。

在发达国家,人们正在进行冷静思考,从监管层面为此次危机的教训寻找合适的回应。但在一些较为贫困的国家,政治家却不会愿意把监管方面的事务留给监管机构处理。美国金融部门的问题不仅仅让新兴市场的民粹主义者翻新了他们对金融市场的批评,而且还让他们联合起来指责自由企业和自由贸易。

这些批评说到了点子上,但方向有误。这个世界目前仍然没有明白如何去监管复杂成熟的金融体系,但在如何管理相对不那么复杂成熟的金融体系方面,它已经学会了很多。因此,新兴市场的金融体系在过去10年的成就令人印象深刻。自亚洲金融危机和俄罗斯金融危机以来,金融监管、公司治理以及透明度都有所提高。政府在管理自己的财政上取得了极大的进步,同时各央行也制定了更多的独立政策。这些进步帮助解释了,为何我们在新兴市场上迄今为止尚未看见更多的连带损害。

事实上,新兴市场对这场全球危机的正确反应,应该是加速改革,加强金融和监管的基础设施,同时尽量注意避免引致此次危机的一些偏离方向的激励措施。然而,恰恰相反的是,一些重要的改革正在发生逆转。在印度,出于政治目的的贷款豁免曾经毁坏了这里的信贷文化,而这一现象目前正在卷土重来。欧洲复兴开发银行(EBRD)/世界银行(World Bank)最近的一份调查显示出,人们对许多市场机构(包括银行)深度不信任,而在许多前苏联国家,人们对中央计划体制这一日渐式微的工具普遍抱有怀旧之情。

许多反金融的行动是借穷人之名,即使真正的受益人是政治家自己。可笑的是,随着技术的提高以及法律基础设施的发展,给一些古老问题带来了新的解决措施,金融部门在世界很多地区终于开始给穷人提供服务。在非洲,银行和手机公司正在吸引前所未有的大量人口进入到支付系统。农作物保险和微观金融等金融创新正在促进新种子和肥料的传播使用,而期货市场为套期保值和价格发现提高了便利。印度出台了一项新法律,承诺资助谷物仓库以及电子仓库收据的发展,使得农民可以储存自己的收成,并且得到用以储存粮食的资金,直到他准备出售。这可能会比多年的国家干涉对农业信贷更加有益。

中东欧的工业化经济体是在毫无金融体系的情况下开始向市场经济转型的,它们脆弱的银行真正将信贷扩展至政府、大公司以及富人之外,几乎用了10年的时间。但现在,一些资本金充足、通常有外资背景的机构积极资助私企的重组,将信贷扩展至风险较大的小企业,并且为想要购房的人提供抵押贷款。由于更加便利的资金获取渠道,波罗的海国家的人民信任他们的银行,甚至超过对政治、法律机构的信任。

所有这些进步可能会面临风险,尤其是如果全球性金融危机比预计的更加长期、更加深刻的话。融资渠道将会收缩,人们对金融机构及市场的支持也会如此。新兴市场将再次为它们的经济灵魂而战——而我们曾经以为,它们的经济灵魂已经确定。很重要的是,工业化国家的政府不要选择目前这个时机,重新考虑自己在贸易以及资本流上的位置,否则可能助长反市场的情绪。因为过去的危机经验表明,市场机构的表面比我们想象的还要更加薄弱。

埃里克•贝里勒夫(Erik Berglof)是欧洲复兴开发银行的首席经济学家。拉古拉姆•瑞占(Raghuram Rajan)是芝加哥大学商学研究所(University of Chicago Graduate School of Business)的金融学教授。

译者/董琴

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Eastlaw.CN,a member of Eastlaw.net Group