Suchergebnisse

This paper examines financing mechanisms to support infrastructure development and connectivity in Northeast Asia - comprising the Northeastern People's Republic of China, Japan, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), the Republic of Korea, Mongolia, and the Russian Far East. Although this subregion has developed the Greater Tumen Initiative, the extent of intergovernmental cooperation for cross-border infrastructure investment is not as strong as in other subregional cooperation programs in Asia, such as the Greater Mekong Subregion Program and the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Program. Using various previously published estimates, this paper finds that the total infrastructure investment needs for the subregion excluding Japan and the Republic of Korea (in transport, energy, information and communication technology, and the environment) could be in the order of $63 billion per year over the next 10 years, and of this total governments in the subregion will have to mobilize external funding of $13 billion a year, focusing on national infrastructure projects in the DPRK and Mongolia and high-priority cross-border projects in Northeast Asia. The paper considers three options as a cooperative financing mechanism for the subregion: special and/or trust funds set up in the existing multilateral development banks (MDBs), a structured infrastructure investment fund supported by MDB(s), and a new subregional multilateral development bank. Then it suggests that the Northeast Asian governments may begin with setting up special and/or trust funds at the existing MDBs and move to creating an infrastructure investment fund, following the good example of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Infrastructure Fund, once sufficient confidence and trust is built and the DPRK returns to the international community. The paper recommends against the establishment of a new development bank in the subregion.

Abstract.  Deepening market‐driven economic integration in East Asia makes intraregional exchange rate across the region increasingly desirable and necessary. The paper suggests that East Asia's emerging economies begin to choose a currency basket as a monetary policy anchor to enable all East Asian currencies to collectively appreciate vis‐à‐vis the US dollar, while maintaining intraregional rate stability, in the event of surges of capital inflows or a rapid unwinding of global payments imbalances. Following this initial step, East Asia may agree on more rigid intraregional exchange rate stabilization schemes through, for example, an Asian Snake or an Asian Exchange Rate Mechanism.

Deepening market-driven economic integration in East Asia makes intraregional exchange rate stability across the region increasingly desirable and necessary. This paper suggests that East Asia's emerging economies begin with a currency basket system based on the G3 (US, Euro area and Japanese) or G3-plus (including emerging East Asian) currencies as a monetary policy anchor. This arrangement will enable all East Asian currencies to collectively appreciate vis-à-vis the US dollar, while maintaining intraregional rate stability, in the event of continuous surges of capital inflows to East Asia or a rapid unwinding of global payments imbalances. Such a system would contribute as an initial step to an East Asian monetary zone. After sufficient convergence and with stronger political commitment, East Asia may agree on more rigid intraregional exchange rate stabilization schemes through, for example, an Asian Snake or an Asian Exchange Rate Mechanism.

The East Asian crisis was the result of interactions between massive capital flows and weak domestic institutions. This paper examines the weaknesses in the financial and corporate sectors that were at the heart of the crisis, reviews the economic consequences of these weaknesses and outlines the progress in financial and corporate sector restructuring. Significant progress has been made in reforming East Asian financial sectors. Governments have committed themselves to improving the regulation and supervision of banks and non-bank financial institutions, raising competition in the financial sector, strengthening corporate governance, and developing local capital markets and equity financing. East Asia's experience has shown that if a systemic crisis in the financial and corporate sectors develops, governments need to put in place coherent frameworks for resolving banking and corporate distress. Governments will also need to segment the crisis and prioritise their responses.