In November 2016, we published the “Practical Guide for Measuring Retail Payment Costs”, an innovative methodology that can be customized to country needs and circumstances, without losing the international comparative dimension.
The guide enables countries to measure the costs associated with retail payment instruments, based on survey data, for the payment end users, payment service/infrastructure providers, and the total economy. The guide also enables countries to derive projected savings in shifting from the more costly to the less costly payment instruments.
More than half of the world’s population lives in Asia and its robust growth is supporting the world economy. After weathering well the 2008 crisis Asia is now in the spotlight with currencies depreciating and capital markets in retreat. One widely voiced concern is rapid expansion of credit in the past decade fueled by abundant liquidity. Globally, and in Asia, regulatory response to the 2008 crisis has been to strengthen financial regulation and de-risk financial intermediation. Yet the reality of credit markets in most Asian economies is quite different from that in high income economies. While domestic credit by financial sector represented on average over 100% of GDP for high income OECD countries, emerging Asia’s average in 2014 stood at 60%. The differences across countries are substantial in this diverse region, but in two thirds of Asian economies domestic credit is less than 60% of GDP. The reality for most economies in Asia is that of limited and often inefficient financial markets which do not serve fully their growth needs. Low level of financial inclusion is a major contributing factor and a major challenge.
Like many World Bankers, I took some time recently to look through the newly released 2015 World Development Report “Mind, Society, and Behavior.” From my perspective, in the Finance and Markets Global Practice, one thing jumped out immediately: The report is packed with insights that are directly relevant to our work on financial inclusion.
In the Overview alone, the reader is met with an abundance of findings related to consumer protection, financial capability, savings and other key topics involving financial inclusion (grouped together under the theme of “household finance,” which is fully explored in Chapter 6). We’re told of how changes to the framing of payday-loan terms dramatically altered borrowing behavior in the Unitedc States; how embedding financial messages in an engaging television soap opera in South Africa improved the financial choices of viewers; and how SMS reminders increased saving rates in Bolivia, Peru and the Philippines.
Of course, this is not the first body of work to summarize key behavioral lessons learned from decades of careful research on financial inclusion: See, for example, Chapters 6-9 of Banerjee and Duflo’s Poor Economics or the Bank’s 2014 GFDR on Financial Inclusion.) But these examples do help drive home the key message of the report: Paying attention to how people think, and to how history and context shape their thinking, can improve the design and implementation of development policies and interventions that target human behavior.
The report highlights that psychological impulses such as present bias, loss aversion and cognitive overload can lead to poor financial decision-making. For those in or on the edge of poverty, the ramifications of these poor decisions – low savings, chronic over-indebtedness, investment shortsightedness – can be devastating. We are reminded that most adults in developing economies do not benefit from the sophisticated financial tools such as automatic salary deposits, mandatory retirement contributions, or default insurance programs that help mitigate the effects of automatic thinking.
Yet, as outlined in Chapter 6, there are a range of interventions that have been shown to help address behavioral constraints on financial decisions in a developing-country context. Many of those interventions take advantage of what we know about the natural processes of the mind, using techniques such as framing, default settings and emotion persuasion to nudge people toward better financial decisions.
Available in Bahasa
The new airport in Banda Aceh was as magnificent as the Taj Mahal—bright, with endless marble floors and beautiful domes. You can almost imagine a reflecting pool, maybe a garden…OK, I might be getting a little carried away. But if you had ever travelled through the old airport—something like a Greyhound bus station in a rust-belt city with a runway attached—you’d understand my excitement.
That was more than four years ago. Since then, the entire city has transformed. Just take the roads. I used to bike all over the city, so I know from first-hand experience that many of the roads were in bad shape, with huge potholes and puddles as big as lakes. But now? You might think you were driving in Germany. Every road is perfectly paved, even the narrow, single-lane ones. When it rains, the water just drains away.
Read this post in Bahasa.
Last week the World Bank launched a new approach to fostering green innovation called the Indonesia Green Innovation Pilot Program. Its aim is to learn how open innovation principles can foster the generation of market-based solutions to clean energy. A core team of designers (Catapult and Inotek) will work with rural communities, the public and private sectors to design clean energy solutions that can be adopted by the market. Keeping in line with open innovation, its first activity is to identify challenges or “problems” that will be addressed by the program through a crowdsourcing approach. So if you are in any way familiar with rural communities and energy issues in Indonesia, the program invites you to submit a challenge here until March 17.
But, if you think coming up with the kind of technology required to tackle climate change will require something akin to a Manhattan Project, rest assured, you're not alone. Googling "climate change" and "manhattan project" returns a whopping 1,540,000 results. But what does creating a "Manhattan Project" really mean? Besides uncomfortable thoughts of human-inflicted destruction, sheer scale is the first thing that comes to my mind. At its peak, during World War II, the US government employed 130,000 people in the Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb. The project's size together with several other features made it a classic case of what I would call "brute-force innovation": it was centrally-planned, closed, and science-driven. Even though the project included research teams across different universities, public research labs and companies across the United States, nothing was leaked in or out and each team had a very specific assigned task and plan. Through the Manhattan Project the government spearheaded the research, developed, testing and deployment of a revolutionary technology from start to finish over a span of four years. And there were no startups, spin-offs, royalty incentives, public-private-partnerships, venture capitalists, crowdsourcing, first-mover advantage, standard-setting or IPOs. Basically none of the buzzwords we associate with disruptive innovation in the 21st Century.
Read this post in Bahasa.
Ambitious and fast rising—these words aptly describe modern Indonesia. Amidst a global economic slowdown, Indonesia was the third fastest growing economy among the G-20 for 2009 and it continues to post strong economic growth, at a projected rate of 6.4% for 2012. Improving economic competitiveness by creating a more salutary business climate is one of Indonesia’s national priorities for 2010 to 2014.
Indonesia is walking the talk. Doing Business in Indonesia 2012 launched January 31 in Jakarta, finds that all 14 cities previously measured in Doing Business in Indonesia 2010 have improved business registration processes over the last two years, while 10 out of 14 cities expedited the approval of construction permits. During his keynote address on the launching of the report, the Minister of State Ministry for Administrative Reforms talked about the cities moving from 'comfort zone' to 'competitive zone'.
Beberapa tahun yang lalu, saya mendapat kesempatan berenang di sebuah kolam renang berukuran besar, dengan air hangat, di luar ruangan, saat musim dingin. Mungkin ini seperti sebuah hal yang mewah, dan di banyak tempat memang demikian. Tapi di Islandia, kita bisa berenang sepanjang tahun di kolam renang panas bumi. Islandia terletak di atas perbatasn lempengan tektonik Eurasia dan Amerika Utara, yang secara perlahan sedang bergerak saling menjauh, sehingga menjadi sumberdaya panas bumi yang luar biasa. Selain kolam renang luar ruangan sepanjang tahun, sumberdaya terbarukan ini juga digunakan untuk pemanas ruangan, air panas, dan listrik.
A few years ago I had the pleasure of swimming in a big, heated pool. Outdoors. In winter. It sounds like an unaffordable luxury, and in most places, it is. But in Iceland, you can swim all year round in geothermal swimming pools. Iceland sits on the boundary of the Eurasian and North American tectonic plates, which are slowly pulling apart, giving it extraordinary geothermal resources. Besides year-round outdoor swimming, this renewable resource provides heat, hot water, and electricity.