June 1998 Insights Issue #26Currency crises: the policy falloutWhat seems most disturbing about the Asian crisis is that it happened to countries that had been so successful for a long period. Successful not just in economic growth but also in terms of rapidly growing exports, low rates of inflation, high rates of savings and relatively equitable distribution of wealth. One key aspect common to the Asian crisis and the Mexican peso crisis is the role played by the frailties of international capital markets as a major cause of currency crises. Highly mobile capital plays positive roles. However, it can have very problematic aspects. Paradoxically, these negative effects can be strongest for economies that either are - or are seen as about to become - highly successful. A successful economy offers high yields and profits to international investors. If these investors can find ways to enter these economies, or if their entrance is facilitated by capital account liberalisation, they will rush in. This surge of capital inflows will affect key macro-economic variables. Exchange rates tend to become greatly over-valued; the prices of key assets - like shares and land - tend to rise significantly and quickly. As a result there is both an increase in real income (as imported goods become cheaper) and an increase in perceived wealth (as asset prices become at least temporarily higher). Banks tend to increase lending, lifting liquidity constraints. As a result of these factors, individuals consume more, hence private companies increase their investment.
The sum of these individual decisions has extensive macroeconomic implications. The current Balance of Payments account deteriorates, often quite rapidly, as both consumption and investment rise. Initially, this is not seen as a problem, as foreign lenders and investors are happy to continue lending, investing, or both, given high profitability combined with the perception of low risk, as they are going into what is broadly seen as a successful economy. Then, something changes. The change could be domestic or international. It could be economic or political. It may be an important change or a relatively small one. The key element is that this change triggers a sharp modification in perceptions, leading to a large fall in confidence in the economy among internationally mobile investors. These could be either foreign investors in the country or nationals able and willing to take their liquid assets out of the country, or both. The change of perceptions tends to be both large and quick. A country that was perceived as a successful economy or a successful reformer - for which no amount of praise was sufficient - suddenly is seen as fragile, risky and crisis prone. The change of perception tends to be far larger than the magnitude of the underlying change warrants. The frightening aspect is that there is a very strong element of self-fulfilling prophecy in the change of perception. Currency crises happen to a significant extent because lenders and investors fear they can happen. The fact that they first stop lending and investing and then pull out contributes greatly to making their worst nightmares come true. As a result, there can be much overshooting. Exchange rates can collapse, as can stockmarkets and property prices. Governments or central banks are forced to raise interest rates to defend the currency. As a result, banking systems become far more fragile than they were before, as previous weaknesses are magnified and new faultlines emerge. Currency crises have punitive development costs. This makes preventing them absolutely essential. A condition for crisis prevention is that countries follow prudent macroeconomic policies. This is a necessary but not sufficient condition, in particular as capital surges distort key macroeconomic variables. It follows that additional measures are needed, nationally and internationally, to discourage excessive surges of potentially reversible capital flows. Recipient countries can tax short-term capital inflows without discouraging long-term flows. Chile's reserve requirements are one example. Even so, national measures may not be enough. Added international measures are required to discourage such surges, using levers like risk weighted cash requirements (see box ).
Stephany Griffith-Jones with Stephan Pfaffenzeller Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RE, UK T: +44 (0)1273 606261 F: +44 (0)1273 621202 Email: StephanyGJ@ids.ac.uk or stephanp@ids .ac.uk See also "Global capital flows - should they be regulated?" Stephany Griffith-Jones, MacMillan (1998) |
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||