Regulatory choices for low income countries
1 / 19

Regulatory Choices for Low Income Countries - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated On :

Regulatory Choices for Low Income Countries. Layna Mosley Dept. of Political Science UNC Chapel Hill Introduction. Recent trend: increased private capital flows to Africa Policy question: How can low-income nations best take advantage of private capital flows?

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Regulatory Choices for Low Income Countries' - otto

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Regulatory choices for low income countries l.jpg

Regulatory Choices for Low Income Countries

Layna Mosley

Dept. of Political Science

UNC Chapel Hill

Introduction l.jpg

  • Recent trend: increased private capital flows to Africa

  • Policy question: How can low-income nations best take advantage of private capital flows?

  • Concerns: benefits of capital account openness are contingent on macroeconomic stability and regulatory capacity.

  • Recommendation: gradual transition to capital account openness.

    • Sequence: regulation prior to liberalization

    • Requires increased technical capacity, as well as political will to regulate.

Private capital flows to africa l.jpg
Private Capital Flows to Africa

  • High growth rates (>5% on average) in Africa in recent years

    • Strong growth predicted to continue.

  • Decline/leveling off in ODA flows (excluding debt relief) to African nations

  • Private investors attracted to high returns, growth foreceasts, diversification (uncorrelated with other markets),

  • Private capital flows

    • 2006: net private capital flows exceeded bilateral aid grants.

    • FDI increased by 44% in 2006 (extractive sector)

    • Increased foreign participation in local bond markets (i.e. Kenya, Nigeria, Zambia)

      • 17 nations now have sovereign credit ratings (local & foreign currency)

    • Development of local stock exchanges (albeit often small)

Legal capital account liberalization l.jpg
Legal Capital Account Liberalization

Based on Chinn and Ito scores

Actual capital account openness l.jpg
Actual Capital Account Openness

Data from Lane & Milesi-Ferretti (2006)

Actual capital account openness7 l.jpg
Actual Capital Account Openness

Data from Beck et al (2000)

How to benefit from openness l.jpg
How to benefit from openness?

  • A large literature on the effects of capital account openness on economic growth.

  • Mixed findings

    • Different sample countries, time periods, and measurements.

    • Variation across type of capital (FDI and equity flows vs. debt)

    • Importance of “pull factors,” sometimes generating contagion.

  • Central issue: contingent effects

    • Thresholds matter (i.e. Kose et al 2006)

    • Strong macroeconomic fundamentals » » growth (i.e. Edwards 2008)

    • Weakly regulated financial sectors lack capacity to absorb (and manage) inflows (i.e. Prasad et al 2007)

      • Central issue for this paper: regulatory challenges

Regulatory issues in africa l.jpg
Regulatory Issues in Africa

  • Background

    • International attention to standards and codes.

    • Issues of compliance (political will) and capacity

  • How do African countries, as a group, compare with other countries?

    • Standards example: SDDS (1 subscriber); vs. GDDS

    • Governance indicators (Kaufman et al 2007)

      • Regulatory quality, rule of law, control of corruption

      • Three groups:

        • EMBI-Global countries (excluding 6 African EMBI-G)

        • Eight African nations w/ increased participation in public debt markets (Botswana, Gabon, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia)

        • All other African nations.

Regulatory issues in africa12 l.jpg
Regulatory Issues in Africa


    • ~650 completed since 1999.

    • 15 percent have involved African nations

    • 28African nations; most frequent participants are Tunisia (13 ROSCs covering six areas), Uganda (10 ROSCs, 6 areas) and Mozambique (9 ROSCs, 5 areas).

    • Most frequently assessed areas (for Africa) are data dissemination and fiscal transparency, followed by banking supervision.

  • A subset of recent ROSCs is summarized in the paper

    • Six FSAPs (Uganda 2003, Tanzania 2003, Ghana 2003, Mozambique 2004, Madagascar 2006 and Namibia 2007).

    • ROSCs for Botswana (2007, data quality) and Kenya (2008, fiscal transparency).

Regulatory issues in africa13 l.jpg
Regulatory Issues in Africa

  • Lessons and patterns from these ROSCs:

    • Progress: banking system supervision (Tanzania); banking sector diversification (Madagascar); well-developed financial system (Namibia)

    • Many challenges, including

      • Banking sector development

      • Banking sector weaknesses

      • Capital market development

      • Debt management

      • Financial sector supervision and regulation

      • Legal system and corporate governance

      • National statistics and accounting systems

Conclusions l.jpg

  • Improve data on the extent, maturity and composition of capital flows.

  • Maintain an awareness of volatility often associated with (short-term) capital flows.

    • Debt management offices

    • Rollover and currency risk.

    • How to attract longer-term investors?

  • Take sequencing seriously

    • Need for targeted, substantial technical assistance.

    • Avoid “one size fits all” prescriptions.

Conclusions15 l.jpg

  • Time horizons

    • Some international codes and standards may be inappropriate for the least developed countries (i.e. Basel II).

    • Meeting international standards may mean foregoing the shorter-term benefits of capital account openness.

  • Policy issue: might capital account openness facilitate regulatory improvements?

    • Domestic politics: will the “losers” from openness use regulatory issues as a justification for continued closure?