Essay on Development Policy Learning from Nepal's First
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Essay on Development Policy Learning from Nepal’s First Diaspora Bond Issuances Thomas Probst NADEL MAS-Cycle 2010-2012 March 2012 1 Abstract So far, only a few countries have launched diaspora bonds – Israel and India being the most prominent examples. In 2010 and 2011, Nepal’s central bank issued the country’s first diaspora bonds. Even though Nepal’s diaspora is large and provides a steady flow of remittances, the Government of Nepal could only raise a fraction of the amount initially expected. The weak market response was caused by several factors that need to be addressed in order to improve the results of similar bond issuances in the future. This paper identifies challenges and makes recommendations in a number of areas such as the narrow buyers universe, limitations in the distribution channels, regulatory challenges, technical issues, lack of a functioning secondary market, unattractive interest rates from an investor’s point of view, and a missing understanding among the market participants regarding the intended use of the raised funds. Key words: Diaspora, Bonds, Nepal, Remittance, Development Finance 2 Table of Content Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 2 Table of Content ................................................................................................................ 3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 4 2. Rationale for the Government of Nepal to issue diaspora bonds ................................. 5 3. Size of Nepal’s diaspora, its savings and remittances .................................................. 6 4. Characteristics of Nepal’s first two diaspora bonds ..................................................... 7 5. Challenges faced by Nepal during bond issuance ....................................................... 11 6. Lessons learnt ........................................................................................................... 14 Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ 17 References ....................................................................................................................... 18 3 1. Introduction Diaspora bonds are debt instruments that are targeted at the diaspora of a specific country and allow tapping into the wealth and income of a country’s emigrants. Countries, sub-sovereign entities, as well as private companies can issue such bonds. Unlike foreign currency deposits (FCDs)1, “diaspora bonds are typically long-dated securities to be redeemed only upon maturity". The purpose of issuing diaspora bonds is usually to finance long-term investment projects. In practice, the examples of the Government of Israel and the Government of India are probably the best-studied cases of successful diaspora bond issues. Ketkar and Ratha have analysed these two cases in detail.2 Since 1951, Israel has raised funds with the help of its diaspora on a regular basis and India has done so three times since 1991. So far, Israel and India have raised US$ 32 billion3 and US$ 11 billion from their diasporas, respectively. Another country that successfully launched diaspora bonds is Sri Lanka, which raised a total of US$ 580 million between 2001 and 2007 through the Sri Lanka Development Bond programme. The programme also targeted Sri Lankans living outside of their home country. According to Ketkar and Ratha4, also South Africa has a project to raise funds from its diaspora and Lebanon seems to have approached its emigrants for funding in the past, too. Recently, Nepal tried to join the ranks of the countries that can successfully raise funds through their diaspora, though without much success. The reasons behind Nepal’s attempt to issue diaspora bonds for the first time are laid out in section 2. Section 3 provides an overview of the size of Nepal’s diaspora, its savings and remittances. In section 4, a closer look is taken at the characteristics of Nepal’s diaspora bonds before section 5, which provides an analysis of some of the reasons that caused the low take up of bonds in the markets. Finally, section 6 concludes this essay with a number of recommendations and an outlook. 1 Ketkar and Ratha (2007: 4) define foreign currency deposits (FCDs) as follows: “Diaspora bonds are different from foreign currency deposits (FCDs) that are used by many developing countries to attract foreign currency inflows. Diaspora Bonds are typically long-dated securities to be redeemed only upon maturity. FCDs, in contrast, can be withdrawn at any time. […] Therefore, FCDs are likely to be much more volatile, requiring banks to hold much larger reserves against their FCD liabilities, thereby reducing their ability to fund investments. Diaspora bonds, in contrast, are a source of foreign financing that is long-term in nature.” 2 Ketkar and Ratha (2010: 252). 3 DCI (2012). 4 Ketkar and Ratha (2007: 3). 4 2. Rationale for the Government of Nepal to issue diaspora bonds In July 2009, Nepal’s finance minister, Surendra Pandey, announced in his budget speech that the Government of Nepal (GoN) planed to issue its first ever diaspora bond in order to raise funds for not-further-specified infrastructure projects.5 The announcement of the proposal was generally welcomed in Nepal’s English-speaking press. 6 The financial industry in particular, was initially upbeat and had high expectations. Raising funds through diaspora bonds is seen as a way to bolster the government’s finances and to channel part of the significant remittance inflows of Nepal into more productive investments. Even though a number of scholars hold the view that remittances have a positive impact on economic development and poverty reduction, some pundits think that from an economic and social perspective, the disadvantages of remittances outweigh their advantages. They argue that the inflows are not used in a very productive manner. Instead of being used for goods with an investment character, they are spent on consumer goods. Another point is that many of the consumer goods purchased in Nepal with remittance income need to be imported. That contributes to a further increase in the already significant trade deficit of Nepal and does little to support domestic production and job creation. If invested in real estate, remittances “can distort asset prices and actually exacerbate poverty by pricing many poor families out of the real estate market”.7 In some cases, remittances also lead to an exchange rate appreciation, thus hampering growth (this consequence is also known as “Dutch Disease”). Due to the short-term poverty reducing effect of remittances, Chami and Fullenkamp8 see a vicious circle at work and argue that large amounts of remittances can negatively influence the quality of governance and undermine long-term economic development: “A remittance-receiving household no longer has to care as much about the quality of the government and its ability to provide infrastructure and institutions that facilitate growth. If conditions are bad at home, families send more members abroad and use remittance income to compensate for the lack of government services. They lose 5 Pandey (2009: 31). 6 See Ghimire (2011), Pokharel (2010) and also Pokharel (2011). 7 Chami and Fullenkamp (2009). 8 Ibid. 5 interest in pressuring the government to deliver better services. The government, for its part, does not feel compelled to provide these services because it realizes that these households can fend for themselves, and the quality of government declines even further”. In that sense, capturing at least a small fraction of the remittance for development purposes would help to counteract some of the negative side effects that are associated with large remittance inflows. Moreover, Nepal’s weak infrastructure is clearly insufficient for a country with a population of approximately 30 million9 and needs to be upgraded. Large investments in hydropower plants, highways and airports are required to support the economic growth desperately needed for poverty reduction. Currently, the country mainly depends on foreign aid to finance its infrastructure projects. As such, diaspora bonds can also be seen as a potential means to regain some independence from official development assistance. Having said that, it should not be forgotten that using the proceeds for investments in infrastructure projects might contribute to a further increase in the trade deficit, due to the fact that such projects normally require large amounts of imported inputs. 3. Size of Nepal’s diaspora, its savings and remittances Nepal has a large diaspora that provides the population of its country of origin with significant liquidity and remittance flows. Ratha and Mohapatra estimated that roughly one million Nepali in the working age live abroad, which is more than three per cent of the country’s population.10 In terms of savings by its migrant workers, Nepal is ranked 13th among low-income countries. In 2009, the estimated diaspora savings for Nepal was US$ 1 billion, which is approximately eight per cent of Nepal’s GDP and is equal to the amount that is saved domestically. Emigrants seem to be better educated than the average person in Nepal: While approximately three per cent of the population emigrate, about 5.3 per cent of people with a tertiary level education opt to work abroad.11 Thus, the share