Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Development policy needs for data on remittances
Valsa Shah Economic AdviserDFID [email protected] Jan 2005
Page 2
Weakness of existing data
• Country BoP data - top down • Contaminated• Definition problems – e.g. contain MTOs
and banks? • No measure on informal sector• Aggregated
• Pro poor?• Average value• Frequency• Channel
Page 3
Use of data 1: Remittance Country Partnership work
• Nigeria• Ghana• Bangladesh
• Objectives:• Improve pro poor financial access• Reduce costs and barriers • Improve capacity in the financial sector
Page 4
RCP Recommendations - Government
• Payment systems• Macro impact on receiving economy• Encourage ID systems• Education and awareness• E money legislation• Tackling competition issues
Page 5
RCP Recommendations: private sector development
• Improve rural access• Improve IT systems investment• Encourage corresponding agreements
between banks• Encourage private sector to provide
innovative banking products
Page 6
Use of data 2: Sending end (UK) financial sector
• Lack of data = entry barrier
• Awareness raising of market opportunities• Influence investment • Encourage competition • Improve transparency
Page 7
What are we looking for? Household surveys
• Average value• Volumes• Frequency• Method of flow• Reasons for using method• Formal/informal split• Status of sender/beneficiary + ID• End user prices • Trends over time
Page 8
Products and price surveys(sending and receiving countries)
• Comparison of products available• Price comparison• Consumer information guide• Encourage competition and innovation
between competitors
Page 9
Verify statements
• Remittance beneficiaries are poor• The poor are more likely to be users of
informal methods• The value of informal remittance flows is
very significant• There are significant numbers of illegal
migrants sending money back
