Author Archives: Diane Coyle

More bankers needed?

Posted on by

“Half the world is unbanked,” is the title of an early chapter of a new book, [amazon_link id=”026201842X” target=”_blank” ]Banking the World[/amazon_link], edited by Robert Cull and others. Counterintuitive as it seems, for those of us living in countries with too much banking, too little banking is a big problem. For a long time the best, indeed one of the only, books on the issue of financial services for the truly poor has been [amazon_link id=”0691148198″ target=”_blank” ]Portfolios of the Poor,[/amazon_link] edited by Daryl Collins and others (see also the terrific Portfolios of the Poor website for additional material).

[amazon_image id=”026201842X” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Banking the World: Empirical Foundations of Financial Inclusion[/amazon_image]

Collins has a chapter in this new book, on measuring what financial services poor people use. It starts with an example about how important basic financial services can be in helping people earn more – a study of fertilizer use in western Kenya, where the biggest barrier to using fertilizer is timing savings in order to have enough money available to buy the fertilizer at the right time. I think access to secure means of savings is fundamental – far more important than microcredit, which has been so much the focus of research and policy debate so far.

Although I’ve not yet read all the chapters in this book, it collects together a number of empirical studies piecing together the evidence that will be needed to help develop inclusive financial services. It includes a number of intriguing ones – such as using biometrics for identification and security purposes. This is interesting because – although the chapter doesn’t address this issue – global anti-money laundering and ‘know your customer’ regulations – are wholly paper-based, which excludes people with no fixed address, no bills addressed to them, few formal documents at all, and no access to photocopiers. It is worth asking whether alternative approaches ID schemes could offer adequate security to serve the real purposes of such regulations. (I think the digital money guru Dave Birch has written about this although I can’t track down the link at present.)

I also like it that the book has a section called ‘Cautionary Tales’, included as a warning against ‘silver bullet’ thinking (“All we need to do is X and we will end poverty”). Not all financial services boost growth or encourage entrepreneurship, and some can be harmful. The examples here are the disappointing effect of remittance flows into Vietnam and the damage done by easy access to mortgages in some of the lower income Eastern European economies.

The final chapter, by the editors, lists ten unanswered questions, the first of which is the need for much more evidence on whether and how access to financial services has a beneficial impact for people on low incomes; which financial services are most valuable; why do ‘micro’ services struggle to scale up; and does growing access to financial services increase the risk of financial instability? As this list indicates, there is much that we don’t know, and the answers are relevant to financial inclusion within the rich economies as well as in low income countries. However, this book is a welcome addition to our present state of knowledge and will be of great interest to people working on this aspect of development.

The power and glory of GDP statistics

Posted on by

An intriguing-looking book has arrived: [amazon_link id=”1780322739″ target=”_blank” ]Gross Domestic Problem: The Politics Behind the World’s Most Powerful Number [/amazon_link]by Lorenzo Fioramonti. I’ve long thought people in general and economists in particular pay too little attention to statistics – how they are constructed, what they actually measure, how their availability shapes or distorts decisions, how best to present them in charts and tables to give a true and intelligible account of an underlying social reality. Most people unfortunately find the subject dull – hence the old joke about an extrovert statistician being the one who looks at your shoes, not his own, when he’s talking to you. Equally, discussion of the economy bandies the term GDP around as if it were a natural object out in the world, measured by diligent statisticians in the way meteorologists measure rainfall, when it’s entirely a social construct.

[amazon_image id=”1780322739″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Gross Domestic Problem: The Politics Behind the World’s Most Powerful Number (Economic Controversies)[/amazon_image]

Anyway, I’m looking forward to reading this book, although paging through suggests it ends up in the cul-de-sac of ‘alternative’ green indicators like the ISEW. But I won’t prejudge it.

What will make banks care about their customers?

Posted on by

Yesterday I gave evidence to the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, on competition (lack of) in retail banking – alongside two distinguished former competition regulators, John Fingleton and Clare Spottiswoode. The transcript will be published later. My message was that banks are mistaken when they say they are competing vigorously with each other – just look at the cut-throat rates on offer in the ‘best buy’ comparison tables. My experience on the Competition Commission for eight years taught me that big firms always regard their competition as intense but they can’t distinguish their intense oligopolistic rivalry from a competitive market. That intense – often loss-leading – rivalry over a narrow range of goods for a small group of customers is cross-subsidised by high margins on other extensive areas of business. (Indeed, you can tell what the banks think of the small group of mobile customers they are competing over from the fact that the industry term for them is “rate tarts”.)

Most bank customers are inert. Switching banks is a huge hassle. If it goes wrong, the consequences are an even bigger hassle, causing enormous potential disruption to bill payments and so on. The only alternatives available will be just as poor in terms of service quality or rates offered. The lack of switching and the cross-subsidies between different groups of customers are clear signs that competition in retail (and SME) banking in the UK is inadequate.

Understandably, there has been a lot of focus since the crisis on tougher regulation. But regulation alone will not improve things for customers. If you rely on regulation to improve service standards, banks will focus on their regulators. It will take competition to get them to focus on their customers. Indeed, more and more regulation will make it harder to get new competitors into the market, and the regulators are not sufficiently focused on using competition as a tool to achieve their aim of improving consumer outcomes – after all, regulators regulate. Competition works indirectly but it is a powerful force for serving consumers, and in particular for innovating and anticipating customer needs.

There is a good example in the Competition Commission’s decision to break up the BAA airport monopoly. The counter-argument was that there are economies of scale, and it’s a complex business, with break-up disruptive and uncertain. But who would have predicted that after the divestment, Gatwick Airport proved able to clear the unexpected snow off its runways quickly and efficiently in December 2010, while Heathrow, still in the hands of the old monopolist, was paralyzed for days?

I’ve not quite finished Anat Admati’s and Martin Hellwig’s [amazon_link id=”0691156840″ target=”_blank” ]The Bankers’ New Clothes[/amazon_link]. It’s absolutely excellent at skewering the bogus claims the banking lobby makes about the consequences of increasing equity requirements and limiting bonuses. It addresses regulatory issues.

What it doesn’t do is consider the competition question. Indeed, in all I’ve read about the banks in recent years, competition issues have been overlooked. There is a misperception that “too much” competition contributed to the crisis, I think, but that’s to make the same mistake of confusing a competitive market with oligopolistic feuding in some areas. The empirical evidence is mixed but leans firmly towards indicating that more competitive banking systems are more stable – the banks tend to be smaller so the “too big to fail” problem is less acute, and smaller banks are simpler so regulators (and their boards) can monitor them more easily.

The Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards was, though, clearly well aware of the importance of increasing competition and new entry. More power to their elbow.

[amazon_image id=”0691156840″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Bankers’ New Clothes: What’s Wrong with Banking and What to Do about It[/amazon_image]

Naked bankers?

Posted on by

I started reading the proofs of a book due out in March, [amazon_link id=”0691156840″ target=”_blank” ]The Bankers’ New Clothes: What’s Wrong with Banking and What to Do About It [/amazon_link] by Anat Admati and Martin Hellwig. The title refers of course to the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale, The Emperor’s New Clothes, in which the emperor is revealed to be naked by a seemingly naive question.

Just a few pages in to the introduction, I can tell I’m going to love it. Sample quotation:

“A major reason for the success of bank lobbying is that banking has a certain mystique. … Many of the claims made by leading bankers and banking experts actually have as much substance as the emperor’s new clothes in Andersen’s fairy story. But most people do not challenge these claims, and the claims have an impact on policy.”

And:

“Politicians seem to be taken in by the lobbying. For all the outrage that expressed about the crisis, they have done little to address the issues involved.”

Not just politicians – I refer to the Financial Times (print edition) headline earlier this week on the weakened liquidity rules accepted by the BIS: “Years of lobbying pay off for banks” (watered down subsequently online to ‘Basel bends on liquidity rules’).

More on the naked bankers when I review the book in due course.

[amazon_image id=”0691156840″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Bankers’ New Clothes: What’s Wrong with Banking and What to Do about It[/amazon_image]

What’s the internet? Start here

Posted on by

It’s more than 16 years since I started writing about the economic and social effects of digital technologies, and some technical knowledge has stuck as well. It was always obvious to me that the internet was going to have – eventually – a revolutionary impact on society. But I do remember discussing my first or second book with a Very Eminent Economist who said that the internet was nothing more than a reduction in transactions costs, and as good economic models already included those, we didn’t need to bother thinking any further about it.

Anyway, despite knowing some things about matters digital, I’ve just devoured John Naughton’s [amazon_link id=”0857384252″ target=”_blank” ]What You Really Need to Know About the Internet: From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg[/amazon_link]. Although it covered some ground that I found familiar, there was plenty of new insight and information too, all written in his characteristically clear style. So for example, if you’re not sure about the difference between the World Wide Web and the Internet (and that’s lots of people, no shame in it), you’ll learn loads from this book.

It gives a terrific overview of a wide range of the business, economic and social trends resulting from the internet and its uses (including the Web). There is both historical context and reflection about future trends. The chapter on the flaws of the copyright regime is excellent, a really useful short introduction to the main issues.

One quibble I would have is that John concludes that economics has little to offer as a perspective on the digital world because it is the science of allocating scarce resources. Apart from the fact that time and attention are the new scarce resources, economics has a lot to offer in thinking about the structure of network markets. (My Very Eminent Economist of the 1990s will have changed his mind by now.) Having said that, I agree with the book’s contention that ecosystem thinking is particularly fruitful.

There were also some lovely details. I enjoyed the quotation from George Miller of ‘The Magical Number Seven Plus or Minus Two’ fame: “My problem is that I have been persecuted by an integer.” And I loved it that the reference to Douglas Adams’ [amazon_link id=”0434003484″ target=”_blank” ]The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy[/amazon_link] was footnote 42. What else?

[amazon_image id=”0857384252″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg: What You Really Need to Know About the Internet[/amazon_image]