Why Asia must think global on financial markets
The creation of a regional bond market to promote financial stability in the Asia-Pacific region became a focus of discussions among policymakers after the east Asian financial crisis of 1997-98. The abrupt reversal of capital flows over a matter of months raised urgent questions about the wisdom of relying on short-term bank financing from outside the region. It also made apparent the need to set aside enough foreign reserves to counteract the painful effects of such sudden capital outflows: by March this year the region’s leading economies had accumulated more than $2,100bn in reserves. Policymakers’ desire to use these to spur growth in the region through the development of efficient primary and secondary markets has led to several Asian bond market initiatives. But it is doubtful whether Asian countries are better off pursuing measures to enhance regional financial integration when they could focus their energies on becoming more integrated with global markets. Last year finance ministers of the Asean+3 group (the Association of South-East Asian Nations plus China, Japan and South Korea) endorsed the Asian Bond Markets Initiative, which aims to develop liquid bond markets for the region. Efforts are being directed towards the creation of a regional clearing and settlement system, a bond rating agency, a trading system and so on. But these measures will simply raise the cost of issuing bonds by requiring an additional financial infrastructure even as they attempt to increase regional financial integration. A regional bond market should simply be part of global markets rather than a separate, isolated island. Moreover, the development of domestic bond markets would be better served by market-based reforms and the strengthening of institutions in individual economies than by the narrow pursuit of regional integration of financial markets. East Asian economies should accordingly focus on liberalising their capital accounts and eliminating the legal and institutional barriers that impede access to global markets. Even so, Asian bond market activities are much more integrated with global markets than is normally thought to be the case. More than 40 per cent of bond issues by Asian borrowers in international financial markets are purchased by Asian institutional investors and about one-third of these issues are underwritten by Asian investment banks. Plans to use Asia’s foreign exchange reserves to develop the region’s economies through mechanisms such as the Asian Bond Fund (ABF) also need to be reassessed. One issue is the optimal way to finance investment in emerging markets. It is cheaper to raise funds in the global market, which already has the necessary financial infrastructure. The small sums involved in the ABF schemes suggest that the ABF neither provides a stable source of development funds for the region nor allows a large amount of dollar reserves from the region to be recycled elsewhere. East Asian economies should be realistic in their expectations of regional bond market initiatives. There are four reasons for this. First, it will take a long time for a regional financial architecture to become established. Second, it may take even longer to co-ordinate monetary, fiscal and exchange rate policies. Third, domestic bond markets in the region fail to attract even intra-regional portfolio investments. Last, any attempt in economies with bank-based financial systems to eliminate obstacles to regional bond market activities and to harmonise the regulatory framework may face political resistance from groups that benefit from the status quo. To ensure a more stable supply of funds to meet Asia’s developmental needs in the short term the regional market initiative should focus on a more realistic and practical agenda of credit enhancement and credit support for small- and medium-sized enterprises. It should also concentrate on bridging the credit gaps of sovereign and quasi-sovereign borrowers. In the long term, a formal dialogue is needed among east Asian economies to co-ordinate fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies and capital account and trade liberalisation. Existing policy dialogues are narrow in either their geographical or their policy focus. The push to create a sheltered regional bond market for Asia is understandable but misguided. There are more productive ways in which the region could direct its formidable energies. Harald Benink is professor of finance at the Rotterdam School of Management and Ghon Rhee is professor of finance at the University of Hawaii. They are co-founders of the Asian Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee
亚洲金融市场不应划地为牢
创建一个区域性债券市场以促进亚太地区的金融稳定性，在1997-98年的亚洲金融危机之后已成为该地区政策制定者们的讨论焦点之一。资本流入在短短数月间陡然逆转，引发了一个迫切需要回答的问题：依赖外来短期银行融资是否明智？还有一点很明显的是，有必要留置足够的外汇储备，以抵消这种资本突然外流造成的痛苦影响。到今年3月，亚洲的领先经济体已累积了超过2.1万亿美元的外汇储备。决策者们想通过发展高效率的初级和二级债券市场，利用这些储备来刺激地区增长，这一期望已引发了几个设立亚洲债券市场的倡议。但是，在亚洲国家可以集中精力进一步融入全球市场之际，以增强区域性金融一体化为目标的举措是否真为上策是令人怀疑的。
去年，东盟+3集团(东盟成员国加上中国、日本和韩国)签署了“亚洲债券市场倡议”(Asian Bond Markets Initiative)，该倡议旨在为该地区发展流动性债券市场。目前的努力方向包括：创建一个区域性清算及结算体系、一个债券评级机构、以及一个交易系统等等。但是，即便这些举措是为了提高地区金融一体化，推行这些举措就需要建立额外的金融基础设施，结果还是要增加债券的发行成本。一个区域性债务市场应当就是全球市场的一部分，而不是一个与世隔绝的孤岛。
此外，要推动国内债券市场的发展，与其狭隘地追求地区金融市场一体化，还不如在各经济体内部推行以市场为主导的改革并加强金融机构。因此，亚洲经济体应当重点关注其资本账户的开放，并消除阻止它们进入国际市场的法律和制度障碍。
其实，亚洲债券市场活动与全球市场的结合程度，要比人们通常以为的高出许多。亚洲债券发行企业在国际金融市场发行的债券中，有40%以上是由亚洲的机构投资者购买，而这些债券中有三分之一左右是亚洲投资银行承销的。
还需要得到评估的是，通过亚洲债券基金(Asian Bond Fund，ABF)之类的机制，利用亚洲的外汇储备来发展该地区的经济。课题之一是，在新兴市场为投资筹集资金的最佳途径是什么。在全球市场筹集资金的成本比在新兴市场低，因为全球市场已经具备必要的金融基础设施。亚洲债券基金方案只包含小笔资金，说明该基金既不能为该地区提供稳定的发展资金，也无法使该地区的大量美元储备在其它地方得到再利用。
对于设立区域性债券市场的倡议，亚洲各经济体的期望也应该现实一点。这里有四个原因：第一，建立一个区域性金融体系需要花费很长时间。第二，协调该地区的货币、财政和汇率政策可能要花更长的时间。
第三，该地区的国内债券市场甚至不能吸引地区内的投资。最后，在金融体系以银行为主的经济体内，任何消除区域性债券市场活动的障碍，并协调监管框架的努力，都可能遇到得益于现状的某些利益集团的政治阻力。
短期内，要面向亚洲发展需求确保更稳定的资金供应，区域性市场倡议应集中于更现实、更实用的议程上，即面向中小企业提供信用增级和信用担保。区域性市场倡议还应当专注于弥合主权和准主权借款方之间的信用缺口。长期而言，亚洲各经济体之间需要开展正式对话，以协调财政、货币和外汇政策、资本账户、以及贸易自由化事务。无论从地域角度还是政策焦点来看，现有的政策对话都显得很狭隘。
为亚洲创建一个受保护的区域性债券市场，这种要求虽然可以理解，但终究是受到误导的。亚洲可以用更具成效的方式来发挥其惊人的能量。
哈拉尔德?贝尼克(Harald Benink)是鹿特丹管理学院(Rotterdam School of Management)金融学教授，李湘健(Ghon Rhee)是夏威夷大学(University of Hawaii)金融学教授。两人是亚洲影子金融监督委员会(Asian Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee)的联合创建人。
