|
The tale of the borrowers and lenders?
|
|
By SYED FURQAN HAIDER SHAMSI
MAS (Economics), MBA (Finance)
Dec 04 - 10, 2000
This article attempts to highlight the major
characteristics and the moral hazards associated with the financial
crisis of the recent past and seeks to signify the policy issues to be
realigned in the light of above attributes. What is required is the
structural policies geared to improve the strength and cogency of
financial institutions. More emphasis should be given to
Demand-Management-Policies.
A common factor in the financial crisis in several
countries was the failure of most debtors to hedge the foreign
exchange risk of borrowing in foreign currencies. A large part of this
borrowing was in US dollars and this constrained the domestic
borrowers to undertake the additional cost of hedging the risk of a
change in the exchange rate against the dollar because the domestic
currency had remained pegged to the dollar for long periods of time.
Most borrowers would also have reasoned that authorities held ample
foreign exchange reserves to defend the peg against speculative
attack. What they would not have known, for instance in the case of
Thailand, the epicenter of the crisis, was that the Bank of Thailand
had been intervening in the forward exchange market for several months
preceding, and that its forward sales had effectively depleted the
foreign exchange reserves in a manner that was not shown in the
published spot figures of its foreign exchange position. A flexible
exchange rate regime and a candid disclosure of the true state of
their foreign exchange reserves by the Thai authorities would have
produced a better evaluation of foreign exchange risk in dollar
borrowing, but in its absence, economic agents has reason to assume
that there was an implicit guarantee of an invariant price for the
dollar
The lending side of the equation, an incentive for
less than one year commitments by foreign banks, since the capital
adequacy prescriptions under the Basel Capital Accord required much
lower ratios of capital to be reserved against shorter term claims
relative to longer term claims. This could also be due to the fact
that the financial authorities will not change adversely the rules of
the game. For instance, one rule implies that holdings of sovereign
bonds are not to be included in any comprehensive debt-restructuring
operation. Another rule advocate that NBFI's are not subject to
disclosure of their commitments in over the counter markets for
contracts in derivatives. Similarly, commercial and investment banks
that enter into such contracts on their own account in off balance
sheet transactions are not required to reveal them either. But, in
fact, the growing range and complexity of financial products, and
their continuing innovation, has generated a degree of opaqueness in
the working of financial markets. This suggests that very large risks
can be taken, which insufficiently known to or fully understood by the
monetary authorities of even the major money-center countries, let
alone the authorities of the developing countries whose institutions
might be holding the other end of such high-risk transactions.
In an emerging market financial crisis, an economy
that had been the recipient of the large scale capital inflow stops
receiving such inflows and faces sudden demand for repayment of
outstanding loans. This abrupt reversal of capital flows leads to the
financial embarrassment. In the twentieth century, there have been
several dramatic international financial crisis involving developing
countries. In l929, Bond financing from USA to Latin America dried up.
In August 1982, Mexico was pushed to the brink of default and in the
same 80s, Chile, Uruguay and Argentina also experienced financial
crisis. More recently Mexico, Turkey and Venezuela in 1994, Argentina
in early 1995 and East Asian countries in 1997 are such examples.
These are all those players who comprises of the
tale of the borrowers and lenders. All the above shared a common
characteristics that was sudden shifts in the financial flows. The
capital inflow has a chain of effects — the real exchange rates
appreciation, which in turn has a negative impact on the recipient
economy's competitiveness in international trade and hence, its
current account balance. This can be countered through intervention of
the central bank in the foreign exchange market, namely buying foreign
exchange.
The question is how to overcome these problems.
Exchange rates policy should also be employed apart from the direct
regulations imposed on foreign capital inflows. The aim should be to
discourage short term speculative flows by introducing a greater
element of uncertainty into the equation.
According to the World Bank (1997), those countries
with highest increase in Bank lending not only were those that later
experienced banking crisis, but also were usually those in which
macro-economic vulnerability was higher- measured by increase in the
current accounts deficit, real exchange rate appreciation, excess
consumption and underinvestment. The policies that have been employed
to combat the adverse effects of capital inflows involve in the first
instance demand-management policies, which include monetary, exchange
rate and fiscal policies. The effects of the financial system require
structural policies geared to improving the strength and resiliency of
financial institutions. The policy implications for less developing
countries specifically, is that major reversals in capital flows will
continue to be a threat if lack of confidence in domestic
macro-economic policies emerges. The crisis of Balance of Payments may
arise as a consequence of both financial and macro-economic
imbalances. The more important of them is the integration of world;
the recent volatility observed with private capital is likely to
increase due to the changes in interest rates, stock market returns,
international portfolio diversification and hedging phenomena.
|