Transformation of the Financial Sector in Indonesia

Introduction : The source and deployment of finance are central issues in economic development. Since 1966, when the Soeharto Administration was inaugurated, Indonesian economic development has relied on funds in the form of aid from international organizations and foreign countries. After the 1990s, a further abundant inflow of capital sustained a rapid economic development. Foreign funding was the basis of Indonesian economic growth. This paper will describe the mechanism for allocating funds in the Indonesian economy. It will identify the problems this mechanism generated in the Indonesian experience, and it will attempt to explain why there was a collapse of the financial system in the wake of the Asian Currency Crisis of 1997. History of the Indonesian Financial system The year 1966 saw the emergence of commercial banks in Indonesia. It can be said that before 1966 a financial system hardly existed, a fact commonly attributed to economic disruptions like the consecutive runs of fiscal deficit and hyperinflation under the Soekarno Administration. After 1996, with the inauguration of Soeharto, a regulatory system of financial legislation, e.g. central banking law and banking regulation, was introduced and implemented, and the banking sector that is the basis of the current financial system in Indonesia was built up. 　　　The Indonesian financial structure was significantly altered at the first financial reform of 1983. Between 1966 and 1982, the banking sector consisted of Bank Indonesia (the Central Bank) and the state-owned banks. There was also a system for distributing the abundant public revenue derived from the soaring oil price of the 1970s. The public finance distribution function, incorporated in Indonesian financial system, changed after the successive financial reforms of 1983 and 1988, when there was a move away from the monopoly-market style dominated by state-owned banks (which was a system of public finance distribution that operated at the discretion of the government) towards a modern market mechanism. The five phases of development The Indonesian financial system developed in five phases between 1966 and the present time. The first period (1966-72) was its formative period, the second (1973-82) its policy based finance period under soaring oil prices, the third (1983-91) its financial-reform period, the fourth (1992-97) its period of expansion, and the fifth (1998-) its period of financial restructuring. The first section of this paper summarizes the financial policies operative during each of the periods identified above. In the second section changes to the financial sector in response to policies are examined, and an analysis of these changes shows that an important development of the financial sector occurred during the financial reform period. In the third section the focus of analysis shifts from the general financial sector to particular commercial banks’ performances. In the third section changes in commercial banks’ lending and fund-raising behaviour after the 1990s are analysed by comparing several banking groups in terms of their ownership and foundation time. The last section summarizes the foregoing analyses and examines the problems that remain in the Indonesian financial sector, which is still undergoing restructuring.

An empirical analysis of the money demand function in India

This paper empirically analyzes India’s money demand function during the period of 1980 to 2007 using monthly data and the period of 1976 to 2007 using annual data. Cointegration test results indicated that when money supply is represented by M1 and M2, a cointegrating vector is detected among real money balances, interest rates, and output. In contrast, it was found that when money supply is represented by M3, there is no long-run equilibrium relationship in the　money demand function. Moreover, when the money demand function was estimated using　dynamic OLS, the sign onditions of the coefficients of output and interest rates were found to be　consistent with theoretical rationale, and statistical significance was confirmed when money supply was represented by either M1 or M2. Consequently, though India’s central bank presently uses M3 as an indicator of future price movements, it is thought appropriate to focus on M1 or M2, rather than M3, in managing monetary policy.

An Empirical Analysis of the Monetary Policy Reaction Function in India

This paper empirically analyzes India’s monetary policy reaction function by applying the Taylor (1993) rule and its open-economy version which employs dynamic OLS. The analysis uses monthly data from the period of April 1998 to December 2007. When the simple Taylor rule was estimated for India, the output gap coefficient was statistically significant, and its sign condition was found to be consistent with theoretical rationale; however, the same was not true of the inflation coefficient. When the Taylor rule with exchange rate was estimated, the coefficients of output gap and exchange rate had statistical significance with the expected signs, whereas the results of inflation remained the same as before. Therefore, the inflation rate has not played a role in the conduct of India’s monetary policy, and it is inappropriate for India to adopt an inflation-target type policy framework.