Syndicate content

Which countries face corporate balance sheet vulnerabilities? a novel monitoring framework

Erik Feyen's picture

The debt of the nonfinancial corporate sector in emerging and developing economies (EMDEs) has risen significantly since the global financial crisis, raising concerns about financial stability and spillover risks. While monetary easing in developed economies has allowed EMDE corporates to raise substantial financing from global capital markets, the sharp decline in commodity prices since 2014 and lower growth prospects across EMDEs have weighted on their firms’ profitability and debt service capacity.

The current global environment raises questions. How vulnerable is the current financial situation of the EMDE corporate sector?  How has it evolved since the global financial crisis?

If you build it (roads), will they (financing) come?

Sumit Agarwal's picture

Investments in public infrastructure is a key component of economic growth strategy among emerging economies, and a particular focus of the Modi government. In general, policymakers and financial economist assume that financing will follow once the roads are built, and thus, facilitate the best use of new productive opportunities created by new road connectivity. However, many rural and agrarian economies suffer from chronic problems of financing, characterized by the absence of formal financial institutions and reliance on informal moneylenders who often are unreliable and charge usurious interest rates. Therefore, a key question remains: if you build it (roads), will they (financing) come?

Whither international banking?

Mahmoud Mohieldin's picture

Strong regional and global integration have been central to countries’ rapid growth and reduced poverty. Few economic sectors can better illustrate integration’s potential benefits — and its significant risks — than the banking sector.

The period prior to the 2008 global financial crisis was characterized by a significant increase in financial globalization, which coincided with dramatic increases in bank sizes. This was manifested both in a rise in cross-border lending and in the growing participation of foreign banks around the world, especially in developing countries. These trends resulted in: additional capital and liquidity; efficiency improvements through technological advancements and competition; and, eventually, greater financial development.

However, when the crisis hit, it also vividly demonstrated how international banks can transmit shocks across the globe. It became clear that systems in place to manage the risks associated with financial globalization were seriously flawed. The results were devastating to economies and to people, halting progress in the fight against poverty, affecting their incomes, health, and prospects for years to come.

A glimpse into state financial institution ownership in Europe and Central Asia

Aurora Ferrari's picture

State-owned financial institutions (SOFIs) are back in vogue. Although the theoretical and empirical debate on state ownership in finance may continue to sway back and forth, the 2007–08 global financial crisis renewed policy makers’ interest in SOFIs as a policy instrument.

This interest is particularly visible in countries in Europe and Central Asia (ECA), where policy makers have turned to SOFIs for countercyclical interventions, as quantitative easing appears to have little impact on economic growth; the cost of bailing out privately-owned financial institutions has mounted; and many countries face significant fiscal constraints. From the publicly-owned British Business Bank (established to assist smaller businesses), to the Investment Plan for Europe (the “Juncker Plan,” which relies on “National Promotional Banks” to intermediate resources from the European Fund for Strategic Investments), SOFIs have been used to fill perceived gaps or complement the public policy toolkit.

Beyond cross-border banking: Debt issuance activity after the global financial crisis

Juan Jose Cortina Lorente's picture

Global banks had rapidly expanded their lending activities abroad before the global financial crisis, during the 1990s and early 2000s. Between 1991 and 2007, the volume of syndicated loan issuances a year by nonfinancial corporations increased more than seven times in high-income countries and more than eight times in developing ones (figure 1). However, the global financial crisis (GFC) hit global banks in the developed world especially hard, which reacted by reducing their cross-border lending activities worldwide.

Figure 1. Issuance Activity in Syndicated Loan Markets, 1991–2014
Figure 1. Issuance Activity in Syndicated Loan Markets, 1991–2014

Source: SDC Platinum.

Financial inclusion measurement goes mobile

Leora Klapper's picture

This blog post was originally published on the Microfinance Gateway.

These are exciting times for those of us in the business of measuring financial inclusion. Technology is remaking the financial system every couple of years — and we're adapting the Global Findex survey questions accordingly. Our new data, which we're launching in April 2018, features bundles of new questions on financial services accessed through mobile phones and the internet.

We started collecting data for the first round of the World Bank's Global Findex database — measuring how adults in more than 140 countries worldwide save, borrow, and make payments — in 2010. Back then, our survey asked people about their use of paper checks.

Mobile money was so nascent that we had a few questions about mobile payments, but nothing about mobile money accounts. That came later, with the vastly expanded mobile money module in the 2014 Global Findex.

Hot off the press: The Global Financial Development Report 2017/2018: Bankers without Borders

Asli Demirgüç-Kunt's picture

GFDR 2018 cover image The decade before the 2007–09 global financial crisis was characterized by a significant increase in bank globalization, which also coincided with dramatic increases in bank size. International banks became the cornerstone of many financial systems around the world, also in developing countries. Proponents of international banking emphasized the potential gains in terms of much-needed capital, know-how, and technological improvements that foreign banks bring, leading to more competitive and diversified banking systems, improved resource allocation, and greater financial and economic development.

However, the global financial crisis has led to a significant re-evaluation of this conventional wisdom. With the crisis, there was a backlash against globalization in general, and the emphasis shifted to the role international banks can play in shock transmission. Developing countries felt the impact of retrenchment by global banks. Global banks were criticized for taking excessive risks. Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the G20 voiced concerns about how to deal with the resolution of too-big-to-fail banks. As a result, regulations and restrictions got stricter in many countries, particularly in developing countries, further contributing to the retrenchment kicked off by the crisis.

Global Financial Development Report 2017/2018: Bankers without Borders, the fourth in the series, brings to bear new evidence on the debate on the benefits and costs of international banks, particularly for developing countries. It provides figures on recent trends, emerging patterns since the global crisis, and evidence on the economic impact of international banking. The goal is to synthesize evidence and data to contribute to the policy debate on international banking.

Addressing the SME finance problem

Sergio Schmukler's picture

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of the economy, being the main contributors to employment in developing and developed countries. Despite their importance, access to finance is relatively limited when comparing to large firms and is a major operating constraint for SMEs. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) estimates that to satisfy the demand by formal SMEs around the world credit had to increase between 900 and 1,100 billion U.S. dollars in 2011.

In a new policy brief (Abraham and Schmukler, 2017), we explore the obstacles to SME finance and some of the solutions that have been put in practice to try overcome them.

Can key facts statements outperform financial education?

Xavier Gine's picture

Now that the Nobel Committee has decided to award the prize once again for work in behavioral economics, it is a good time to study the role of disclosure formats for effective consumer protection.

We partnered with CONDUSEF, the financial consumer protection agency in Mexico, and the Superintendent of Banks in Peru to test which types of product disclosures work best for savings and credit products by low-income consumers in Peru and Mexico.

In a lab experiment, low-income consumers were assigned a financial needs profile—such as having to make two withdrawals per month from a savings accounts and two balance inquiries—and then incentivized to choose the product that best fit their needs. In each round of the experiment, we tested different methods for providing summary product information. In Mexico, we tested comparative tables; in Peru, we tested a key facts statement (KFS) designed by the financial institutions; and in both countries we tested.

Smart investments? The costs of choice and excessive switching in pension funds

Alvaro Enrique Pedraza Morales's picture

Pension funds are rightly viewed as an important source of long-term capital in many countries. Following the global financial crisis of 2008, the theme of long-term investment and the role of institutional investors as providers of domestic capital for economic development has been high on policy makers’ agendas. Despite generally positive findings linking pension system development and economic growth, there are also plenty of disappointments. In too many countries, pension fund investments remain highly concentrated in bank deposits and traditional government bonds. This lack of diversification can be explained by many factors, for instance, unsupportive macro conditions, shortage of investment instruments, poor governance, limited investment knowledge, and regulations with restrictive asset class limits and excessive reliance on short-term performance monitoring.

Pages