The
Sri Lankan rupee has been depreciating rapidly in the last few months
and the satirical website NewsCurry suggested that the US
dollar be adopted to prevent further depreciation. Although this
sounds absurd, as my previous post explained this is actually a
workable and serious proposition.
A
Currency Board would also achieve the same ends and would be easier
to implement than dollarisation. Lets look at the fundamental purpose
of money and how a currency board will help stabilise the currency, and therefore the economy.
Lenin
is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist
System was to debauch the currency. He was right, money serves as the
medium of exchange, and an absence of sound money undermines trade.
Historically, the use of money arose due to the inconveniences of
barter. Money serves three fundamental purposes:
1.
It is the medium of exchange: Money can be used for buying and
selling goods and services. If there were no money, goods would have
to be exchanged through the process of barter.
2.
It serves as the unit of account: Money is the common standard for
measuring relative worth of goods and services.
3.
Store of value: It is the means by which wealth is stored. Without
money people would need to store their wealth as goods, which is
cumbersome and expensive.
Money
oils the wheels of trade; it is obvious that it performs its
functions best when its value is stable. If the value of money
fluctuates widely it undermines it's fundamental purpose. A
simplistic example drives this point home.
Imagine
being contacted by a broker about a 2,500-square-foot house, only to
visit and find a house half the size. The prospective buyer would
have very little trust in the broker. This is purely hypothetical
given that a foot is a foot. Since its definition is unchanging,
2,500 square feet means the same today as it did 20 years ago.
Whatever
the level of trust buyers have in their brokers, square footage will
never be a factor; that is, unless the length of the foot is allowed
to “float,” and its length declines. Suddenly, 2,500 square feet
could very well mean 1,500 square feet in “real terms,” and trust
in brokers will plummet.
This
illustrates the effect of an unstable currency. Sound money has
underpinned the growth of Singapore and Hong Kong. What lessons do
these hold for Sri Lanka?
Hong
Kong has a Currency Board arrangement, which means all currency
issued in the territory must be at least 100 per cent backed by
foreign reserves. Singapore's monetary policy, although no longer a
fixed board (which it once was) retains the key characteristics of a
currency board. A currency board is similar to a fully backed gold
standard.
As
the currency is fully “backed” by hard reserves it is freely
convertible and immune from depreciation. The exchange rate can
remain fixed but in practice many countries that run currency board
arrangements allow a small fluctuation in the exchange rate to
reflect trading conditions. The exchange rate may also be revised
periodically, to ensure
it remains consistent with the underlying fundamentals of the
economy; which is what Singapore does.
The
currency board guarantees the convertibility between the local
currency and foreign currency at the foreign exchange rate in the
currency board system. The local currency is linked with the foreign
currency by the guarantee of convertibility and the fixed exchange
rate. Therefore, the confidence in the local currency is linked with
that in the foreign currency by the currency board arrangement, and
the local currency acquires the properties of the foreign currency
with respect to the basic functions of money.
The
Currency Board cannot “create” money, except when actual reserves
are available nor can it lend money to the Government, usually
described as printing money (or, euphemistically, quantitative
easing).
Since
the Government cannot borrow from the Central Bank (a source of
'easy' money) it must rely on taxes or debt to finance spending,
which imposes a degree of fiscal discipline. This in turn results in
low inflation. As the money supply also changes only with movements
in reserves, interest rates remain fairly stable and are generally
low.
Currency
board systems assure convertibility, instil macroeconomic discipline
limiting budget deficits and inflation, provide a mechanism that
guarantees adjustment of balance-of-payments deficits, and thus
create confidence in the country’s monetary system,
In
other words; the perfect way to impose discipline when grappling with
difficult financial problems.
For
this reason Currency Boards were adopted in several East European
countries when transitioning from Communism. The transition from
communism caused severe monetary shocks in Eastern Europe. To manage
the transition several countries including Estonia, Lithuania and
Bulgaria implemented currency boards with great success; inflation
declined and economic growth picked up.
IMF
studies show that historically, countries with currency board
arrangements have experienced lower inflation and higher growth than
those with other regimes. The lower level of inflation is explained
partly by the greater monetary discipline imposed but also by the
greater level of confidence engendered by adopting the Board.
Note
that a Board is not a simple exchange rate peg (which is what Sri
Lanka had pre-1977) the requirement for the currency to be fully
“backed” by reserves, the restriction on lending to the state and
a long-term commitment to the system usually enshrined in law are
crucial differences that underwrite the stability of the currency.
To
date no currency board has had to be abandoned as a result of a
crisis. The Asian currency crises of 1997 provided a severe test: all
currencies of SE Asia depreciated rapidly except those of Hong Kong
and Singapore. The worst affected was the Indonesian
rupiah which dropped from $1=Rp2,400 to $1=Rp14,500, the Thai
Bhat fell more than 50% and the currencies of South Korea, the
Philippines and Malaysia were all battered.
Alone
amongst its neighbours, the Hong Kong Dollar was unaffected, despite
repeated speculative attacks. Although Singapore allowed its currency
to depreciate by around 20%, to adjust to the relative weakness of
its trading partners during the crisis, it was a matter of choice by
policy makers rather than an event forced on them by circumstances.
Currency
boards were once the norm. Invented by the British they provided the
stability that allowed foreign trade to flourish throughout the
Empire. With the decline of the Empire the boards were gradually
dismantled by the newly independent states, except in a few places
such as Singapore and Hong Kong.
Currency
Boards are now coming back in to use, Sri Lanka is grappling with
huge fiscal and monetary problems, moving to a Currency Board would
improve the stability of the system and provide the platform for long
term growth.
No comments:
Post a Comment