Goldman Sachs continues to build on its prestigious banking legacy

Unlike in other countries, America’s monarchs do not reside in palaces, but rather on Wall Street. Their crowns are constructed not of gold, but of money. Banking dynasties such as the Morgans, Mellons and Rockefellers have enjoyed an almost deified reverence since the inception of Wall Street in the 1890s. When J P Morgan, founder of the eponymous investment bank, died in 1913, the New York stock market closed for two hours and the flags lining Wall Street were flown at half-mast while his body passed through the city.

Goldman Sachs has long been considered the behemoth of banking across the globe

The most revered, though, is unquestionably the resident of 200 West Street in Manhattan: Goldman Sachs has long been considered the behemoth of banking, particularly in the US but also across the globe. As William D Cohan stated in his book Money and Power: How Goldman Sachs Came to Rule the World: “Goldman Sachs has been both envied and feared for having the best talent, the best clients and the best political connections, and for its ability to alchemize them into extreme profitability and market prowess.”

Cohan told World Finance: “It’s harder to get a job at Goldman than it is to get into Harvard.” Author Anthony T Hincks, meanwhile, once commented: “[Goldman Sachs knows] who the president will be before he does.” But the world of banking is changing, and while political connections and investment prowess are certainly valuable, their influence is muted without a loyal customer base.

From rags to riches
Goldman Sachs started life as a sole proprietorship that bought and sold IOUs from New York businessmen. It was set up by Marcus Goldman, a German Jewish immigrant who came to the US in 1848 to find out whether the streets really were paved with gold. Little did he know.
Goldman initially set up shop as a clothing merchant in Philadelphia, which at the time was considered an ‘appropriate’ profession for a man of his standing. He did well for himself, producing five children and amassing a $2,000 personal estate by 1860. But Goldman dreamed of bigger and better things, so, in 1869 – the same year he moved to New York City – he turned his hand to the business of money. He rented a tiny office in the cellar of 30 Pine Street and hammered a plaque to the door that read ‘Marcus Goldman, banker and broker’. Although his life was rather unglamorous and his desk was next to a coal chute, Goldman always wore a tall silk hat and a Prince Albert frock coat.

It wasn’t too long before his grand ambitions turned to reality. By 1882, the business was trading around $30m of commercial paper annually, and held $100,000 in capital. Goldman decided that it was time for a partner, and brought in his son-in-law Samuel Sachs that same year, with Goldman’s son Henry joining in 1885. Just like that, Goldman Sachs & Co was born.

The firm enjoyed considerable success over the following few years, joining the New York Stock Exchange in 1896 and stockpiling $1.6m of capital by 1898. Tragedy struck when Goldman succumbed to a fatal illness in the summer of 1904, leaving the company in the hands of Sachs and Henry Goldman. The two men had starkly different attitudes on almost everything, which would later prove to be Goldman Sachs’ downfall.

In the meantime, the company began to consolidate its rapidly growing financial influence. It entered the IPO market in 1906, taking the hugely successful retail firm Sears public. Henry also began to establish personal stature on Wall Street, and in 1914 was sought out by the government to help design the Federal Reserve System. “Here, at the inception of the government’s regulation of Wall Street, Goldman Sachs was already advising politicians how to do the job,” Cohan wrote in Money and Power. At the time, Henry expressed a desire for the New York Fed to be the most powerful reserve bank in the country, which it is to this day, with Goldman Sachs remaining one of its most important affiliations. In fact, from 2009 until June 2018, the governor of the New York Fed, William Dudley, was an ex-Goldman Sachs partner.

Breaking point
The reign of Wall Street’s dynamic duo came to an abrupt end in 1917, when Henry was forced to resign over concerns about his pro-German stance. His departure caused a rupture between the two families, and left the company that his father had founded entirely in the hands of the Sachs family.

In its current incarnation as an investment banking giant, Goldman Sachs has experienced significant highs and lows over its 149-year history. During the Great Depression, the firm was accused of engaging in share price manipulation and insider trading, which led Fortune magazine to write: “In the [1929] crash, the name Goldman Sachs emerged as a sort of symbol of everything that was bad and ill-fated about Wall Street.”

Just over 30 years later, Goldman Sachs found itself embroiled in controversy once more when the Penn Central Transportation Company went bust with over $80m in commercial paper debts, many of which had been issued by the bank. The sub-prime mortgage crisis in 2007 brought Goldman Sachs the closest it has ever come to collapse, when the firm was found to have profiteered from lending to high-risk borrowers and to have exacerbated the subsequent recession. This led to its transformation into a bank holding company, which was part of an overarching effort to regain the trust of its customers.

Surprisingly, these missteps, catastrophes and near-collapses have barely left a dent in the banks’ golden armour: current total assets stand at a remarkable $958bn, although that is less than its pre-crisis peak (see Fig 1). And that is what is quite so remarkable about this institution: that it is has escaped unscathed, while its competitors have crumbled around it.

Cohan believes that there are several reasons for this. “I think Goldman has always been really good at reinventing itself,” he told World Finance. “I [also] think it has a deserved reputation for excellence, for attracting the best and the brightest, and training them in the Goldman way.” He added that the bank’s market agility has allowed it to spring back from the edge of collapse: “[It] knows how to make money and [it] always figures out how to do it. Even when it looks like [Goldman Sachs] is behind the eight-ball.”

Fresh trials
In the modern era, the bank faces a new challenge: in order to survive commercially, it must attract new clients, and not just figures from the upper echelons of business, politics and finance. Instead, it must appeal to typical man-in-the-street customers, too. In order to do that, it has had to completely redesign its public relations strategy, as Cohan explained: “Once upon a time, [it] didn’t engage as much [with the public], but that’s no longer true. [It’s] a public company, [it] has to file quarterly statements, so [it] has shareholders, the company is global… The bottom line is that [it] has to engage and [it] realises that.”

The global recession in 2008 played a significant role in that shift in priorities, Cohan believes. “I think [it] also had a bit of a rough patch, to put it mildly, after the financial crisis, and I think [it] learned a difficult lesson about the need to be more engaged with the public and shareholders and to be concerned about [its] public relations. [It’s] very much focused on that now,” he added.

The jewel in the heart of Goldman Sachs’ commercial crown is its new savings account, Marcus, which launched in October 2016 in the US and in October 2018 in the UK. Promising a substantial 1.5 percent interest rate, the account is named after the original founder.
It’s an interesting decision from the firm to return now to its family-run roots: the bank became publicly traded in 1999, and there are no members of either the Goldman or Sachs families working for the firm today. The last of the Sachses retired from the company in 1959.

Perhaps it’s a way for the bank to remind customers of its illustrious legacy. As the financial services sector fills up with challenger banks and fintech firms, promising innovation while sacrificing clout, legacy banks are examining new ways to ensure that they remain relevant in the modern era. By naming the account after its founder, Goldman Sachs is gently reminding consumers of its rich heritage, as well as the journey that the bank has been on to cement its distinguished market position. After all, monarchies are not built on technology and innovation: they are constructs of prowess, heritage and wealth.

Mashreq Bank continues to take the digital lead in the Gulf

Spearheaded by the UAE, the Gulf region is gradually transitioning into a cashless society. In line with this shift, we are seeing more and more fintech start-ups disrupting the payments and financial landscape. As bankers, we welcome the innovation.

Digital infrastructure enables out-of-the-box thinkers to experiment with new products, processes and services

Digital payments offer genuine economic benefits, including providing much greater convenience for all types of stakeholders in the economy. Demonstrating the potential in its recently released Cashless Cities: Realising the Benefits of Digital Payments report, Visa found that digital payments could bring up to $2.2bn in net benefits to consumers, businesses and the government in Dubai each year. This figure soars to $6.7bn for Riyadh alone. Both cases highlight the massive potential for large untapped markets that are further behind in their penetration of cashless payments.

Mashreq continues to lead the way in encouraging the adoption of digital payments in the UAE and beyond. For instance, we were the first bank in the region to introduce Alipay, China’s wildly popular mobile and online payment platform. We were also one of the first banks in the UAE to incorporate both Samsung Pay and Apple Pay when they launched in the UAE in April 2017 and October 2017 respectively. Also in 2017, we launched our own digital wallet, Mashreq Pay, which allows our customers to simply tap and pay at retail outlets, making their payment experience far quicker, easier and more secure. In addition, we are part of the Emirates Digital Wallet initiative and are working closely with the UAE Government to enable accessible cashless solutions for the unbanked and underbanked segments of the population.

$2.2bn

Annual net benefits digital payments could bring to Dubai

$6.7bn

Annual net benefits digital payments could bring to Riyadh

We also have plans in place to introduce new digital platforms into the market that will offer customers much more choice in the way that they can make payments. As the oldest bank in the country, we are fully aligned with the vision of the UAE Government to make all government utility services cashless by 2021. Cash still remains dominant in the country today, but with innovation on the rise within the banking sector and a tech-savvy population that readily embraces digital payments, a cashless society does not seem too far away.

Branching out
In line with this emerging trend, other significant changes are being witnessed in the region. According to the UAE Banks Federation’s annual report, banks in the UAE removed 75 of their branches in 2017 alone. Foreign banks, meanwhile, removed three percent. While brick-and-mortar branches are still integral to the banking profession, they have been changing to offer a different experience for customers and financial institutions alike. Previously, customers would visit their neighbourhood branches in order to conduct a variety of day-to-day transactions, such as making transfers, withdrawals and deposits. Increasingly, however, they now use digital platforms to carry out the same tasks. This migration towards online and mobile banking enables them to save valuable time, money and effort. This also allows the banks themselves to allocate their resources far more efficiently – and progressively, too.

At Mashreq, we have responded to this evolution by transforming our branch network. Today, we focus on advisory services that encourage greater human interaction between employees and customers. For everyday transactions, our use of state-of-the-art technology enables customers to benefit from a wide range of self-service facilities. We also have plans in place to expand the range of these solutions in order to make self-service banking much quicker, easier and more accessible across our entire network.

Mashreq continues to lead the way in encouraging the adoption of digital banking in the UAE and across the region.

Embracing digital
There is no question that the digital economy will continue to dominate the key strategic focus of the banking profession in the future. Consumer lifestyles are changing at a pace unlike ever before. With this shift comes a large and growing appetite for digital services – whether it’s to shop, order food, pay bills or bank, the modern customer demands the convenience of doing so at the push of a button.

Technologies like ATMs, which are commonly used by foreign visitors, will soon be upgraded to interactive teller machines, acting as round-the-clock service centres rather than merely being cash-dispensing machines. Additionally, with regional and international digital wallets such as Alipay slowly gaining traction, tourists are expected to migrate further towards cashless transactions, particularly as many prefer to avoid the hassle of dealing in physical foreign currencies.

With all these changes afoot, banks must be able to complement the fast-paced lifestyles of their customers by offering a seamless payments experience across all channels. This, in turn, will enable customers to make quick everyday transactions, while also allowing the bank to deliver expert advisory services whenever more important financial decisions need to be made.

Today, 92 percent of Mashreq’s financial transactions are conducted through automated digital channels, while 65 percent of enquiries are made online or via mobile. Given such widespread adoption, we continue to invest in our digital capabilities. In fact, we anticipate this figure to have reached close to 97 percent by the end of 2018.

Digital-only banks are expected to play a huge role in this shift, using AI technology and big data to offer a simpler, more intuitive and more innovative banking experience to all customers. Mashreq Neo, the first digital bank in the UAE to offer a full range of banking services, is a successful example of this shift: over the past year, we have seen an astounding uptake of Mashreq Neo consumers. We also have major projects in the pipeline to expand these services beyond personal banking in order to cater to businesses and other client segments as well.

Digital infrastructure supports innovation, as it enables out-of-the-box thinkers to experiment with new products, processes and services in a faster and more efficient manner than ever before. Digital systems also offer innovators the ability to evaluate projects more precisely and accurately, thereby enabling them to judge their potential success or failure in advance. This, in turn, will enable them to save invaluable resources, including time, money and talent.

Therefore, innovation is key in this competitive landscape, and going beyond simply offering digital platforms to deliver a truly superior customer experience will be crucial to remaining relevant in such a fast-changing industry.

Remaining agile
Data plays an invaluable role in the world of digital finance. It offers real-time customer insights and analytics, which allow banks to customise their products and services to cater to their clients’ individual financial needs.

A great example of this is our recently launched ‘mortgage 2.0’ product: thanks to readily available real-time data from Al Etihad Credit Bureau and Mashreq’s own technology, which shares insights with our relationship managers, we have developed a new pre-loan approval facility. This mechanism allows our customers to purchase homes in the UAE faster and easier than ever before.

Mashreq Neo also constantly uses real-time data and analytics to make digital-only banking a truly intuitive experience. The data collected from Mashreq Neo consumers helps the bank to analyse the most relevant products and services that matter to this segment. This enables it to invest and expand in the areas that respond to our customers’ financial needs.

In this day and age, it is more important than ever to be agile. Agility impacts operational efficiencies, which in turn translates into a quicker and more enhanced customer experience. As a digital banking leader in the UAE, Mashreq has implemented an agility-based model. It has also leveraged the use of AI, big data, machine learning and cognitive technologies within both our back-end and front-end systems.

Financial technology companies across all sectors worldwide are rapidly disrupting the existing landscape. Against this backdrop, the UAE has embraced this approach with various funds and investment opportunities. Mashreq fully endorses and supports this vibrant sector – indeed, we view fintech firms as strategic partners that share our passion for innovation. The tangible benefits of fintech companies are evident in the way they leverage technology to deliver cost-efficient, user-friendly solutions that offer a far superior customer experience. With our innovation-led philosophy, Mashreq takes pride in having the strength of a traditional financial institution with the heart of an innovative fintech start-up.

New sulphur fuel laws look set to shake up the shipping industry

Each year, billions of tonnes of goods traverse oceans on ships the size of warehouses. With the spread of globalisation, the volume of goods traded by sea has grown by 300 percent since the 1970s, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Today, ships carry more than 80 percent of all goods.

While the global maritime industry is an invisible force for most of us, former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon once called it the “backbone of global trade and the global economy”. And it is only getting bigger: UNCTAD predicted in 2017 that seaborne trade volumes would increase by around 3.2 percent each year until 2022.

The high-sulphur fuel used by the shipping industry has long been under scrutiny

The shipping industry is vital to modern life, but it is also responsible for emitting around a billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) a year. As part of the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) broader plan to clean up the industry in the coming decades, ships will be required to reduce their sulphur emissions by more than 80 percent from 2020. Changing the rules for a sector that guzzled half of the world’s total demand for fuel oil in 2017 will have a significant knock-on effect for the entire oil value chain, impacting everyone from truckers and airlines to ordinary consumers.

Sea change
The high-sulphur fuel used by most of the shipping industry is a thick, opaque substance that has long been under scrutiny by the IMO. This heavy bunker fuel is made from the dregs of the refining process and, when burned, it releases noxious gases and fine particles that damage the environment and degrade human health.

Despite these side effects, it is widely used across the shipping industry. In 2016, global demand for high-sulphur fuels stood at around 70 percent of overall bunker fuels.

300%

Growth in volume of goods traded by sea since the 1970s

3.2%

Predicted annual increase of seaborne trade volume each year to 2022

$60bn

Expected cost to shippers for moving to lower-sulphur fuel

90,000

Approximate number of commercial vessels on the world’s seas

The IMO has been regulating sulphur and nitrogen oxide (SOx and NOx) emissions from ships at sea since 1997. In 2012, the IMO significantly strengthened these requirements, capping the limit for sulphur in fuel oil at 3.5 percent. Now the organisation is going even further by limiting sulphur content to 0.5 percent from January 1, 2020, giving shippers limited time to make extensive operational changes.

Full compliance with this regulation will cause dramatic changes from as early as mid-2019. Analysis by IHS Markit said the switch would result in a “period of huge upheaval in global oil markets, extraordinary margins for some oil refiners, and a potential doubling of fuel costs for shippers”. Consulting firm Wood Mackenzie estimated moving to lower-sulphur fuels could send shippers’ costs up by as much as $60bn in 2020.

“The cost of moving goods by sea will go up, which means consumers will pay more for everything,” Alan Gelder, Wood Mackenzie’s vice president of refining, chemicals and oil markets, told World Finance. “It might only be small, but the cost of moving things across the oceans will rise.”

The ripple effect
The refining industry, which produces the fuel oils used by shippers, will also take a hit from the IMO’s regulations. This will make it difficult for the industry to produce compliant products unless they raise prices, according to Rick Joswick, who is in charge of pricing and trade flow at S&P Global Platts Analytics.

“[Refiners] have to take steps that are currently [uneconomical], and the only way that will happen is if the prices move to allow the refiners to do it and not lose money on it,” Joswick said. As the price of low-sulphur fuels such as marine gas oil spikes higher, so will diesel and jet fuel, ensuring the impact of the IMO’s regulation is felt far beyond the shipping and refining industries. For instance, the rise in the price of diesel means the cost of moving goods on trucks within a country will become more expensive. And because the price of jet fuel is so closely linked to that of gas oil, airline profits are also expected to come under pressure.

“Airlines are very much affected by the price of jet fuel,” Joswick told World Finance. “It directly relates to the fare they charge, and they have seen the number of passengers is really responsive to what the fare is, so it’ll be a challenge.”

This long chain of cause and effect could end up having a knock-on effect on the whole global economy. One energy economist told The Economist that the rising price of bunker fuel and the ripple effects that followed could potentially wipe 1.5 percent from global GDP in 2020.

Pathways to 2020
Shippers can comply with the sulphur regulations in a number of ways, and despite the anticipated price hikes, many are expected to switch to the low-sulphur fuels that are already common in emission-control areas.

Alternatively, a vessel can continue to use heavy bunker fuel if it installs scrubbers, which capture harmful pollutants from exhaust gas. Although an upfront investment is required, these shippers will have the competitive advantage of being able to use cheaper high-sulphur fuels in the future. Energy company S&P Global Platts predicted a “vast amount” of excess heavy fuel oil would be available following the 2020 deadline. After the initial investment, Gelder found that ships with scrubbers can expect a rate of return of between 20 and 50 percent.

Over the past six months, the number of companies looking to use scrubbers has accelerated. “I think more and more the shippers are saying scrubbers look like an economical choice that they can run with, as opposed to just trusting that the refining industry will be able to give them a product at a price they like,” Joswick said.

Ships with scrubbers are still in the minority, though: as of August 2017, IHS Markit said about 360 ships had installed scrubbers, and by May 2018 that had risen to 494 vessels. This is out of a total of around 90,000 commercial vessels on the world’s seas.

In the longer term, liquefied natural gas (LNG) is expected to become a more prominent part of the shipping sector’s fuel supply. LNG produces almost no SOx or particle matter emissions and generates about 90 percent less NOx, according to the OECD. Burning LNG also produces 20 to 25 percent less CO2, which the IMO is also looking to limit. Challenges remain around the infrastructure needed to support the use of LNG, however, and for the most part, its use is limited to new build vessels.

A question of compliance
When the IMO announced its sulphur cap, questions immediately emerged about how the body, which has no enforcement capabilities, would implement the regulations. Experts predict that even without any checks, the majority of companies would not be willing to risk their reputation just to save money on fuel. Gelder told World Finance: “Publicly listed companies that have supply chains with other publicly listed companies expect the supply chain to follow the law.”

From an environmental point of view, the IMO’s regulations are flawed

Additionally, the vast majority of bunker fuel sales go to ships owned by the likes of ExxonMobil, Shell or Maersk – firms that are very unlikely to cheat the system. “It’s not in their interest. It’s not in their DNA,” said Joswick, who spent over 20 years in ExxonMobil’s refining business.

Additional pressure has come from the insurance industry, which warned that shippers failing to use compliant fuels will be deemed unseaworthy, meaning the insurance provider would not be liable for any claim the owner makes. With no checks, Gelder would expect a global compliance rate of about 70 percent.

Official layers of enforcement will likely contribute to an even higher rate of compliance. The country where a vessel is registered – otherwise known as its ‘flag country’ – has a responsibility to enforce the regulations, and a carriage ban enforced by port states will prohibit ships from carrying high-sulphur bunker fuels unless they have scrubbers.

Ships will also be required to maintain electronic records of the fuels they purchase and use.

From his experience at ExxonMobil, Joswick said ships are very unlikely to cheat knowing that they could be blacklisted from any future work with a big company. “You add up all these things, and I think you’re going to come up with a fairly high level of compliance,” Joswick said. Full compliance could be achieved in about four or five years, according to Gelder.

Healthy outcomes
While the IMO’s regulatory changes will certainly cause some level of disruption, it will not last forever. “It just takes time,” Joswick said. “Major investments take four or five years, and [shipping companies] were given two and a half.”
Despite these pending costs, it is important not to lose sight of the benefits of the sulphur limit. In addition to causing acid rain and air pollution, SOx can damage people’s respiratory systems. When burned, the particles that are released can enter the bloodstream and damage the lungs and heart, leading to heart attacks, asthma and premature deaths.

A 2018 study published in Nature Communications found the impact of the sulphur ban would be “substantial” (see Fig 1). Each year, exposure to emissions from the shipping industry resulted in about 400,000 premature deaths from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease, as well as around 14 million childhood asthma cases. If the industry complies with the requirement for lower-sulphur fuels, the number of premature deaths would fall by 150,000 and childhood asthma cases would drop by 7.6 million, the researchers found.

But from an environmental point of view, the IMO’s regulations are flawed: while scrubbers are expected to prevent air pollution, they could end up causing even more pollution in the sea. Gelder explained: “It is perfectly legal to wash the exhaust gas from the ship with seawater and directly discharge that seawater. So you end up with not having air pollution but ocean acidification.”

To fix this loophole, limits must be imposed on oil refiners. “If you wanted to take sulphur out, the best place to take it out is in the refinery, but there’s no obligation on the refiners in this legislation,” Gelder said.

Further muddying the waters is research from as far back as 2009, which shows that sulphur emissions actually have a net cooling effect on the planet. Sulphur emissions scatter sunlight in the atmosphere and help form or thicken clouds that reflect sunlight away.

Although it is admirable that the IMO is pursuing such sizeable changes, this move will come with an equally substantial cost to the global economy. For this reason, the industry must be sure the most robust regulations possible are being implemented. Cutting sulphur will almost certainly prevent premature deaths and illnesses, but regulations must go further to ensure environmental benefits are equal to public health outcomes. Otherwise, the shipping sector risks only delaying sulphur’s chokehold on the planet.

Yılmaz Yıldız: Turkey’s troubles are ‘just a blip on the long-term chart’

Emerging markets are being impacted negatively because of a major paradigm shift in the global economy, says Yılmaz Yıldız, CEO of Zurich Turkey. The huge liquidity post-financial crisis has dried up, and escalating commodity prices are putting pressure on emerging markets. Turkey has been impacted by this paradigm shift – along with some political issues – and dropped in global growth rankings. But, says Yılmaz: its strengths remain. In the first half of this interview Yılmaz discussed in more detail the currency crisis that Turkey is experiencing, and its impact on Turkey’s insurance sector.

World Finance: Setting aside Turkey’s currency crisis, what more general trends are affecting emerging economies today?

Yılmaz Yıldız: The global economy is going through a major paradigm shift, and emerging markets are impacted negatively because of that.

If you remember in 2008-9, after the crisis, the Fed and the ECB pumped incredible liquidity into the financial markets. The Fed’s balance sheet increased from $900bn to $4.5trn from 2007-17. The ECB from €2trn to €4trn. So there was this huge liquidity in the financial markets, and the emerging markets – which need foreign investment – benefitted substantially.

But now there’s this paradigm shift.

Liquidity is being taken back. A strong dollar, high US interest rates, uncertainties, and the commodity and oil prices going up: creates an unfavourable context for the emerging markets. And all the emerging markets are being impacted negatively, one way or another. But they’re not all the same. Especially the ones with high current account deficits, high growth rates, and high indebtedness, are impacted much more negatively than the ones with lower current account deficits and stronger debt dynamics.

And this will continue for a while, I think. Paradigm shifts take a while for everybody to get used to. Let’s say: not easy times ahead.

World Finance: And how is Turkey positioned within the emerging markets? What are your strengths and weaknesses?

Yılmaz Yıldız: Yes, Turkey has been impacted negatively.

If you look at 2017, Turkey was one of the fastest growing economies after China: 7.4 percent growth. That growth was good on its own, but created huge current account deficits. And with that current account deficit, one: the paradigm shift happened, the dollar began to appreciate, and some political problems; the currency has been hit really hard.

But we should not miss the strengths of the Turkish economy.

What made Turkey a very attractive emerging market – most of those are still in place. Huge market of 80 million people? It’s still there. Location? It is still there. A young, well-educated population, positive demographics? It is still there.

If you look at the debt dynamics: debt to GDP is less than 30 percent. Budget deficit is less than two percent. So the indebtedness is probably one of the best in the emerging markets.

And on the other side, Turkey has a very diversified industrial base. So the economy does not depend on any single industry or commodity or market. That good diversification will serve well going forward.

And, with that in mind, and us being in Turkey as Zurich Insurance Group for the long term: there may be ups and downs, but as long as these positive demographics and economic measures are in place, this is just a blip on the long-term chart. And we will continue to be profitable, we will continue to be successful. So: we’re very confident about the future, and in the short-term; yes, sometimes different things happen – not only in Turkey, around the world. We take measures; we move on.

How Turkey’s currency crisis could make Zurich Turkey more profitable

Turkey, once the darling of emerging market investors, is going through some difficult times due to its ongoing currency and debt crisis. Yılmaz Yıldız from Zurich Turkey explains how Turkey’s insurance sector has been affected, how Zurich Turkey has been meeting or exceeding its targets in spite of the crisis, and what the future holds for Turkey. In the second half of this interview Yılmaz discusses the general trends in emerging markets, and how Turkey is positioned within them.

World Finance: What’s been the impact of the crisis on Turkey’s insurance sector?

Yılmaz Yıldız: Since the currency crisis has not morphed into a financial, economy-wide crisis; as of now we see impact, but not as much as what we’ve seen in the currency markets.

However, a stagflation scenario is a high probability. And the non-life insurance sector will be impacted by that. So, what we expect to see is a slowdown in premium growth rates across all lines of business. But more importantly, the currency crisis, one thing that’s happening is: inflation has increased substantially. The figures as of yesterday is the annual rate is around 25 percent. And claim costs are increasing substantially.

On the other side, due to inflation, and due to the increase of interest rates by the central bank, we will also see an increase on the investment income.

What that all leads to is less income from insurance operations, and more income from financial transactions and investment income. So overall the profitability may not suffer – or may even improve due to financial income – but the core insurance business will inevitably suffer, because of higher costs of claims.

World Finance: And for Zurich Turkey specifically? How has 2018 been, and what’s your projection for 2019?

Yılmaz Yıldız: 2018 has been very good so far – even despite the volatility in the last two quarters, we will meet or exceed our targets. Because Turkey and Turkey’s insurance market is still very attractive, and if you have the right strategy, the right team, and a good execution track record, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t be making your targets or exceeding your targets going forward.

To that end, we have launched new innovative products, especially on the cyber and on the health side, and on the SME side. So those new products will generate revenues for us. Secondly, we’re in the process of having some new partnerships in place, and also with our existing partnerships we are doing more with less.

Secondly, to contain the claim inflation and to remedy the rather negative movement of expenses, we are really focusing on underwriting discipline and claims management. So that’ll continue.

So, overall on the financial side, we expect that our profitability will not suffer. Our growth rate will slow down. But overall we’re doing well in 2018, and we’re confident that we’ll do well in 2019 as well.

World Finance: So what does the future hold? What’s the timeline for Turkey getting back on its previous trajectory?

Yılmaz Yıldız: I think one thing that is really important to realise is, Turkey is going through a currency crisis. It is not a financial crisis, and it is not an economy-wide crisis. It is only a currency crisis. And with the right measures to contain this currency crisis, it will not be too difficult for Turkey to get back to its growth trajectory very soon.

And the government has announced the midterm plan, in which I think most of the right measures have been taken. And as long as these are done, it will be contained as a currency crisis, and it will not morph into a financial or economy-wide crisis.

World Finance: Yılmaz Yıldız, thank you very much.

Yılmaz Yıldız: Thank you.

Bladex is using its expertise to help ease supply chain issues in Latin America

One of the most significant developments in foreign trade in Latin America came with the establishment of Mexico’s manufacturing sector and the development of ‘maquiladoras’ – essentially, factories run by foreign companies that operate under preferential tariff programmes. To provide a sense of the magnitude of change, 20 years ago, 80 percent of Mexico’s exports were commodities – primarily crude oil. Today, almost 90 percent of Mexico’s exports are manufactured products.

Structural imbalances and significant infrastructure deficiencies make Latin America dependent on foreign capital

In the 1980s, the maquiladora industry also spread to other parts of Central America. Today, it represents about 54 percent of Central American exports, but only five percent of Latin America’s total exports. These exports are primarily low value-added products. Mexico, on the other hand, has been able to create a complex value-added manufacturing base for its own exports. Beyond the Mexican phenomenon, exports from Latin America have primarily been a
commodity-based story.

Open for business
Foreign imports into Latin America fluctuate with the degree of economic openness each country exhibits – and that openness is very much a function of the prevailing political winds. Although the dynamics may shift over time, foreign trade continues to represent a key economic component for Latin America. The Foreign Trade Bank of Latin America (Bladex) has played a vital role in facilitating this trade, providing solutions for financial institutions, companies and investors. World Finance spoke with Gabriel Tolchinsky, CEO of Bladex, about the company’s commitment to the region’s present and future success.

54%

of Central American exports come from the maquiladora industry

5%

of Latin American exports come from the maquiladora industry

The 1970s and 1980s were tough for Latin America. With the onset of inflation came significant political turmoil and a mistrust of local currencies, which meant foreign trade became a desperately required source of income for Latin Americans. Governments and central banks in the region grappled with how to promote trade and bring much-needed hard currency into the region.

Foreign banks were already full of Latin American credit – mostly through loans to governments that were running significant deficits as they sought to prop up their inflation-battered economies. Local banks were not equipped to pick up any significant slack left by the dearth of foreign banks to finance trade transactions, as their own sources of funding were limited.

“The idea behind Bladex was to establish a bank with a regional footprint that could lend to the local banks,” Tolchinsky explained to World Finance. “Local banks, in turn, would use those funds to finance foreign trade. It was a brilliant idea then and continues to be today.”

As a result of the work undertaken by Bladex, many local banks now have access to international funding and many foreign banks have a local presence. Nevertheless, Latin America continues to experience sharp economic convulsions from commodity price volatility, weather patterns, political turmoil and structural deficiencies. Fiscal problems are prevalent throughout the region, and some countries also experience balance of payment issues.

“Under a stable environment for both commodity prices and non-Latin-American economic growth, we believe trade will continue to grow, on average, just shy of six percent annually between 2019 and 2023,” Tolchinsky said. “This is significantly below the last positive cycle, from 2003 to 2011, when Latin American trade grew on average above 14 percent per annum.”

Even considering these challenges, foreign trade in Latin America is set for more growth. The two main drivers in Latin American trade are higher prices for key commodities and incremental foreign demand, particularly in the US and Asia. Latin American exports generally correlate with commodity prices and external economic growth – whatever the level of trade, Bladex is sure to have the right solutions for all customers and markets.

Opportunities aplenty
The current political and economic climate in Latin America is uncertain. The US, Latin America’s biggest trading partner, is exhibiting signs of disillusionment with the current global commercial order. Should the US cease to be a reliable market for Latin America, it’s important to understand the implications. If Peru deems China a more reliable partner for purchasing agricultural products, it will also buy more Chinese-manufactured products. Trade relations will change, logistics will be set up and new agreements will ensue.

Further, structural imbalances, such as fiscal and current account deficits and significant infrastructure deficiencies, make Latin America dependent on foreign capital. Although many countries develop local capital markets, foreign investor participation is still crucial because foreign capital owns a significant percentage of the assets in local markets. In Mexico, for instance, foreign investors own about 60 percent of the local treasury bills and price these assets in terms of their potential for US dollar returns.

“This dependency on foreign investors effectively strips away domestic monetary policy control,” Tolchinsky explained. “Local interest rates can fluctuate with the entry and exit of foreign investors and inhibit the central bank’s ability to lower interest rates to stimulate the local economy or raise interest rates during economic expansions. So even though inflation is under control and economic growth is subpar, Mexico is on a path of raising interest rates, just to keep up with the US and retain foreign investors.”

After the turbulent 1970s, 80s and 90s, democracy now appears to be entrenched in most of Latin America. But as politicians in many countries are learning, democracy is about more than just voting: governmental accountability and available legal processes are shaking another foundation of the business, as well as political classes that previously operated with significant impunity. It’s worth noting how many Latin American governments and business leaders are subject to corruption investigations.

“Uncertainty and volatility create opportunity,” Tolchinsky said. “It is in these turbulent times that Bladex excels. We can distinguish which entities are set to endure while foreign capital tends to flee. We’re optimistic about the future of Bladex and its growth potential.”

Opportunities are already being identified: Bladex is bullish about Colombia, believing that credit demand will start growing there and local banks alone will not be able to fill the gap. In Mexico, disappointment with a policy shift set by the incoming administration is repricing national assets. This repricing also represents an opportunity for Bladex to originate short-term assets. In Brazil, meanwhile, elections are over, which means it should also start growing. Even in Argentina, which is likely to enter a recession while complying with its IMF programme, there are some strong companies in existence. At Bladex, the economic trajectory of each Latin American country is carefully considered, whether times are good, bad or somewhere in between.

A regional hub
There currently are some standout trends developing in the Latin American market; the first of these concerns exports of value-added products along international supply chains. It is likely that some countries may try to increase their exports to new markets, such as Asia, as trade channels get redefined. The second is that ‘multilatinas’ – Latin American companies that have outgrown their home market and become multinational – are set to play a larger role in regional growth. The third relates to intraregional trade, which is set to increase from 16 percent to 23 percent.

In addition to these trends, a number of potential risks have appeared on the horizon. These include the continued strength of the US dollar, possible protectionist measures by Latin American countries, tighter financial markets, and volatility stemming from geopolitical events. Bladex has its own risks to navigate: the main challenge will come in the form of new financial technology companies intent on disrupting established players within the finance industry.
“Fintech companies already present a challenge for financial institutions in the developed world and will eventually enter into Latin America,” Tolchinsky said. “At Bladex, we have started streamlining our operational infrastructure, our processes and procedures while also reducing legacy technological complexity. We believe that streamlining is the first step in pursuing technological efficiencies.”

There are a few unique aspects that will help Bladex fight off its competitors: first, it has a regional footprint that allows it to price Latin American cross-border risk. This means that Bladex can better evaluate risk and optimise trade value chains. In addition, Bladex’s role as a reference bank in Latin America means it is often the first choice for businesses operating in more than one market. However, Bladex doesn’t aim to compete with local banks. In fact, more often than not, local banks are its clients.

“Bladex was initially set up to lend to local banks,” Tolchinsky said. “Most local banks are our clients and we have excellent relationships with them throughout the region. We not only refer clients to these local operators, but we also participate – and invite local banks to participate – in syndicated transactions. Syndications are an integral part of our business and are often the avenue to finance mergers, acquisitions or expansions throughout the region.”

During the first half of 2019, Bladex aims to solidify its operating model to more efficiently support its existing business processes. As its operational and technology platform improves, there are numerous growth paths it can take to expand its product breadth. If it is successful, there is little doubt that it will be recognised as the leading institution for supporting trade and regional integration across the Latin America region. Bladex certainly has lofty goals, but there is no reason why they cannot be achieved.

Making the case for beta leadership

For much of the 20th century, across all areas of the business ecosystem, the strongest and most successful style of leadership was considered to be the ‘alpha’ approach. Stereotypically, this equated to the person with the loudest and most aggressive voice immediately being lauded as the most authoritative.

Although beta leadership is often pitted against its more authoritative alpha cousin, the two aren’t mutually exclusive

In recent years, however, the landscape has shifted away from the alpha paradigm into more conciliatory, constructive and altogether kinder leadership. The ‘beta’ leader may not shout the loudest, but that certainly doesn’t equate to weakness – in fact, introducing this model of management can prove more beneficial in the modern workplace than the wholly alpha style of yesteryear.

Collaboration, not competition
What does it mean to be beta? Entrepreneur, venture capitalist and ‘corporate anthropologist’ Dana Ardi went in search of the answer in 2013, when she penned The Fall of the Alphas: The New Beta Way to Connect, Collaborate, Influence and Lead. Ardi was inspired by her time working in private equity and venture capital, during which she encountered many businesses with authoritarian or alpha leaders. These leaders, she told World Finance, had a “myopic” way of thinking about growth, with new ideas “unable to be infused”. By contrast, she likened beta-led firms to orchestras, with “the best players and the best instruments for that moment in time, that piece of music you have to play, using the talents of the entire team to be able to get there”.

89%

of Americans think it is crucial for leaders to create a safe workplace

58%

of Americans think it crucial for leaders to be compassionate and empathetic

Broadly speaking, then, being a beta leader means adopting a collaborative and consensus-driven approach. It relies on understanding that although a leader occupies a senior position in an organisation, they are also a cog within the
corporate machine.

Beta leadership is not about being dictatorial, but about delegating: it’s about recognising the contribution that every employee makes to a high-performing business, and giving them the space to be creative and enjoy what they do, knowing that this leads to happier and more productive teams in the long run.

It’s a misconception, though, to think that beta leadership is in any way associated with weakness. “Being beta doesn’t mean absolving yourself of responsibility. You’re still a leader,” said Ardi. Rather, she said: “It’s about going down a few layers within an organisation, and letting people feel empowered to take responsibility.”

A paradigm synergy
Although beta leadership is often pitted against its more authoritative alpha cousin, the two aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s possible for a leader to have both alpha and beta characteristics, and to deploy one or the other depending on the situation they find themselves in.

Clinical psychologist and CEO of Leadershift Jeffrey Hull explored this duality when he created his FIERCE model. FIERCE stands for flexible, intentional, emotional, real, collaborative and engaged, and functions on a sliding scale, with each category representing a spectrum of alpha to beta. For instance, in the flexibility dimension, the alpha leader will be direct and authoritative, thereby taking a minimally flexible approach. By contrast, the beta leader will be inquisitive and will collect feedback from employees to reach a consensus on decisions, representing a maximally flexible approach.

The model, Hull told World Finance, is designed to enable leaders to examine their own communication and leadership style, as well as how they collaborate with their team. “It provides a framework for a leader to reflect on their strength and to consider expanding their portfolio of skills,” he said.

Hull’s sliding scale model makes an important point about leadership in general – that it’s not about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There’s nothing to say that beta leaders should never be authoritative or decisive – rather, this style of leadership should be reserved for specific situations, and shouldn’t be a person’s sole mode of functioning or communication. “As an executive coach, I frequently have to work with leaders whose particular way of operating has become problematic or is too limited. That one-trick pony style of leadership is very often unsuccessful,” Hull explained.

Beta banking
Of all the sectors that could benefit the most from a few more beta leaders, financial services is high on the list. Legacy institutions, in particular, are famed for taking a strongly alpha approach. This is often due to a compassionate or community-orientated approach being viewed as ‘soft’ and incompatible with organisations that need to be ‘tough’. However, Hull said: “The research on effective leadership and on high-performing teams is really beginning to show that a more consensus-driven leader is often more successful in the long run.” Indeed, the Pew Research Centre recently found that 89 percent of Americans consider it imperative for leaders to create a safe and respectful workplace, while 58 percent think it essential for leaders to be both compassionate and empathetic.

Even the most alpha of legacy institutions can implement a beta leadership culture. According to Ardi, with “willingness to change, evolved leaders and a team effort”, the beta framework can simply be folded in. This change can also dramatically improve the fortunes of a company, allowing it to function more efficiently and, as such, compete in a new way. Ardi told the story of a successful financial services firm, from which the CEO was departing due to ill health. Ardi was invited in to help with the hiring process for his replacement, but when she arrived, she found that the competitive alpha culture within the business was so strong that it was creating an unhealthy atmosphere, with various managers constantly engaging in one-upmanship and vying for the next promotion.

Ardi sought to tackle it from the top: rather than allowing the board to hire an alpha CEO and upset the apple cart within the senior team, she transformed the business into a ‘three-legged stool’, with the existing CFO and president taking a prominent role in the recruitment process. “It was a beta hire,” she said, “because they hired not their boss, but their collaborator. They were a team the day that he set foot [in the office]… Everyone within in the ranks understood that this was now a functioning team, and the company thrived as a result.”

And it’s not just legacy institutions that can benefit from beta leadership. Diversification of the financial sector in recent years and the introduction of open banking regulations such as PSD2 have made space for smaller firms that now have more of a chance of challenging behemoths for their market monopolies. However, smaller firms like these lack the clout of financial titans and have had to follow unique, innovative paths to make themselves heard in an increasingly
populated industry.

Instead of opting for authoritative alphas to lead their business, many fintech firms and challenger banks have hired beta heads in an effort to boost innovation and creativity. Take P2P lending firm Funding Circle, which recently floated on the London Stock Exchange for £1.5bn ($1.9bn): each of its three founders plays an equally important role in the running of the company, eschewing the archaic idea that a company has a sole figurehead leader.

“That command and control style… That doesn’t work anymore,” Ardi said. Such a singularised leadership model is not conducive to creativity. Hull explained: “If you think about the type of environment you need [in order] to come up with new ideas and to take risks, to brainstorm and try out new things, break out of the box, so to speak – that doesn’t really jibe very well with a hard-nosed, type-A, directive leadership style.”

Technology’s increasing role in financial services is also far better aligned with a beta leadership style than an alpha one. As transactions become more complicated, more cross-firm collaboration is needed, with whole financial ecosystems sometimes created just to get one deal through. Ardi cited the example of a private equity firm: “If you’re on a deal team closing a transaction, you’re typically working with an investment bank, and a law firm, [and] maybe another private equity firm too. As a leader, you have to demonstrate a different kind of emotional intelligence when working across multiple organisations. Bringing together diverse constituents, taking into account multiple business cultures and still being the person to drive action forwards, remaining the leader of that opportunity – that’s a task for a beta leader.”

A new era
The move towards beta leadership is symptomatic of broader shifts in the workplace as a whole. “The whole context in which we work is impacting leaders – the convergence of time zones, the accessibility of information, our use of social media,” said Hull. All of these new challenges require a diversified and agile approach – a key beta characteristic. Leaders are also now grappling with a multigenerational workforce, with Baby Boomers and Generations X, Y and Z all adding their voices to the mix. The challenge of uniting disparate groups is best tackled by a beta leader.

It’s clear then that the perception of alphas being stronger and betas being weaker is a tiresome stereotype, and simply not true in a modern working environment. The most successful leaders do not limit themselves to a single paradigm, but cultivate emotional intelligence and productive employee relationships, enabling them to nimbly adapt their style to any given situation. Alpha is out: agility is in.

Davos 2019: in pursuit of a stable world

As 2019 begins, the foremost event on the calendars of the powerful and wealthy is approaching. On the snow-capped slopes of the Alpine resort town of Davos, thousands of political leaders, business magnates, and other trailblazers will gather in January for the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting to discuss the most pressing issues on the global agenda.

It is clear the event will centre on the many layers of uncertainty in today’s economic landscape

This year’s meeting, titled ‘Globalisation 4.0’, will centre on ‘shaping a global architecture in the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution’, meaning it seems inevitable that much of the debate will focus on the many layers of uncertainty in today’s economic landscape. At the 2018 meeting, following a string of highly divisive world events, including the election of President Donald Trump in the US and the UK’s vote to leave the European Union, the WEF sought to take on the seismic shift in international relations with a meeting dedicated to ‘creating a shared future in a fractured world’.

Founded in 1971, the WEF is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, a country synonymous with neutrality. In 2019, as global relations continue to struggle under the weight of divisive policies and clashing ideals, Davos is the perfect stage from which to continue hashing out
a path towards unity.

Disunity reigns
“America first doesn’t mean America alone,” Trump declared at Davos 2018. The statement stirred conversations about whether the world economy was being steered by isolationist policies, and the potential damage this could do to globalisation. But Trump’s words were not followed by action: in fact, throughout 2018 he deepened fractures in the global economy by escalating a trade war with China over what he alleged were unfair trading practices by the communist nation.

Jack Ma, the Chinese business tycoon who co-founded multinational technology giant Alibaba, warned that a trade war could have the same implications as a physical war. “It’s so easy to launch a trade war, but it’s so difficult to stop the disaster of this war,” Ma said at Davos. “When you sanction the other country, you sanction small businesses, young people, and they will be killed, just like when you bomb somewhere. If trade stops, war starts.”

The key issue faced by policymakers in Beijing is that the America they used to know no longer exists

Dr Yu Jie, China Research Fellow at Chatham House, agreed with Ma’s statement, telling World Finance that while a political war on the battlefield is definite, a trade war is unlimited and unspecified in its scope. “This potential economic crisis translates into an imminent political crisis, and it affects every single aspect of the everyday life of the ordinary people [in China],” Yu said.

Trump did not heed Ma’s warning, however, as the US introduced a tariff on the import of solar panels and washing machines in January 2018. In March, Trump boasted on Twitter that trade wars are “good” and “easy to win”. He announced he would impose steep, unilateral tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium to the US in response to the dumping of cheap Chinese steel on the market, which drove prices down for US producers. China, meanwhile, called the tariffs a “serious attack” on international trade.

The implications of Trump’s trade crusade rippled out to Europe as well. After a tit-for-tat skirmish during which time the EU threatened tariffs for the import of unmistakably American products such as Kentucky bourbon, Levi’s jeans and Harley-Davidson motorcycles, a ceasefire was declared. However, it is still not clear whether this peace will last.

Even so, any dispute with China could disrupt the entire global supply chain. “It’s a trade war against the entire world, not just China,” Yu said.The US has threatened tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $500bn, but as the trade war engulfs more and more products, prices across numerous industries are expected to rise.

The key issue faced by policymakers in Beijing is that the America they used to know no longer exists. While Chinese decision-makers are familiar with the US’ intellectual elites – the type of people who work on Wall Street and attend Harvard University – they now must learn to engage with an “unexpected and unpredictable president”, Yu said.

This is a huge turning point for China’s international relations, and it could have big implications for its role in the global supply chain going forward. “This will potentially not just harm [the] Chinese economy for four years or eight years. This is for a generation, a decade,” Yu said.

Curbing tech power
The spotlight also turned on big technology firms at Davos 2018. Billionaire investor George Soros said tech giants like Facebook and Google had become “obstacles to innovation”. That criticism will likely carry over to Davos 2019 after Google was fined a record $5bn by the EU in July for breaking competition rules. Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition commissioner, said that by forcing smartphone manufacturers to preinstall its Chrome web browser and search apps, Google had “denied rivals the chance to innovate and compete” and had “denied European consumers the benefits of effective competition” in the market.

Davos in numbers

444

Number of participants at Davos in 1971

3,000+

Number of participants at Davos in 2018

$10m

Approximate cost of security at Davos in 2018

340

Number of global political leaders that participated in 2018

40

Western heads of state that participated in 2018

10

African heads of state that participated in 2018

9

Middle Eastern heads of state that participated in 2018

6

Latin American heads of state that participated in 2018

The fine was the latest move in the EU’s long-term mission to crack down on US tech giants. Karin von Abrams, Principal Analyst at market research firm eMarketer, explained: “[The EU has] been very consistent, historically, in trying to create an atmosphere, a legal structure and a system [that] enables it to bring companies and other entities to book if they feel that US firms, or firms headquartered elsewhere, for that matter, want to operate in Europe or take advantage of Europe to boost their own status or their income, but they don’t want to play by EU rules.”

Apple and Amazon are also likely to face increased scrutiny after they became the first and second public companies in history to soar to valuations of $1trn over the summer. “Valuations like this confirm that the tech industry really is increasing the engine of the world’s economy,” von Abrams said.

But although the technology sector is generating enormous fortunes and a substantial number of jobs, critical questions remain about the impact that companies with such staggering valuations could have on competition in the broader marketplace.

According to von Abrams: “We still live in a marketplace [that] we inherited substantially from an earlier era in terms of capitalism and commerce, but in a free market economy where things are changing so rapidly and these companies are becoming so valuable so quickly, they have really incalculable advantages over smaller tech firms.”

By investing or failing to invest in certain forms of technology, this handful of powerful tech firms has the ability to reshape the entire landscape of the tech sector. Furthermore, as technology creeps ever deeper into our lives, questions must be asked about the subterranean influence it can have on aspects of society beyond the boundaries of the tech industry.

One pertinent example is social media’s role in influencing recent elections. In March 2018, Facebook was forced to issue a public apology after it emerged that the company had not safeguarded its users’ data, allowing information from almost 90 million accounts to be harvested by a data firm. The now-defunct Cambridge Analytica allegedly used this information to show US voters personalised political advertisements based on their psychological profiles during the 2016 presidential election.

Facebook and Twitter both drew the ire of world leaders in 2018 for their alleged complacency towards political interference on their platforms. Both sites have admitted to removing fake accounts linked to Russia that tried to influence the US presidential election. Alongside an ongoing torrent of fake news, these revelations have certainly shaken global confidence in the democratic proces

“I think we’re really starting to understand just how radically disruptive some of the things [are] that are happening, for example, on the political side,” von Abrams said. “There are a number of really volatile situations that could have an enormous effect on all of us in a really, really short time, and I think a lot of us are just hoping that we’re not suddenly pitched into one of these chaotic situations and have to rethink the way the world works, because that would be quite challenging.” At a time when their valuations are soaring, one big question to focus on is whether these tech giants can be controlled, and what these controls might look like, von Abrams told World Finance.

Another essential component of the technology revolution that will undoubtedly rumble through Davos again in 2019 is artificial intelligence (AI). In 2018, Ma called AI a “threat to human beings”, but said ideally it should support us. “Technology should always do something that enables people, not disables people. The computer will always be smarter than you are; they never forget, they never get angry. But computers can never be as wise [as] man,” Ma said.

Meanwhile, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said that while AI does present dangers, including the loss of some jobs, the potential benefits cannot be ignored: “The risks are substantial, but the way you solve it is by looking ahead, thinking about it, thinking about AI safety from day one, and [being] transparent and open about how we pursue it.”

In a recent report, the WEF itself warned that AI could destabilise the financial system by introducing new weaknesses and risks. Although machine learning creates more convenient products for consumers, it also makes a world that is more vulnerable to cybersecurity risks, it explained.

As AI breaks further into the mainstream, its prominence as a talking point will only grow. Von Abrams said: “It’s a buzzword, of course, but I think there will be further discussions simply because it does take time for people to understand more fully how they can apply it to their own business, and a lot of those applications are not yet reaching the real world.”

The Lehman aftershocks
Despite heightened global tensions in 2018, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has held fast to its expectation that the world economy will grow by 3.9 percent in both 2018 and 2019. The Trump administration’s protectionist tariffs are the “greatest near-term threat” that could knock this rise off-kilter, the IMF observed.

In this time of uncertainty, world leaders are beginning to look back on how far the global economy has come in the past decade

In July, Maury Obstfeld, Economic Counsellor of the IMF, admitted “the possibility for more buoyant growth than forecast has faded somewhat”. Meanwhile, risks to the downside have taken root: the IMF warned that if the trade war escalates, 0.5 percent could be slashed off global growth by 2020.

In this time of uncertainty, world leaders are beginning to look back on how far the global economy has come in the past decade. September marked the 10th anniversary of the collapse of US banking giant Lehman Brothers, which sparked a financial crisis that affected the lives of millions. In a blog post, Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the IMF, said while much had been done to clean up the financial system since 2008, the long shadow of the crisis “shows no sign of going away any time soon”.

“The fallout from the crisis – the heavy economic costs borne by ordinary people combined with the anger at seeing banks bailed out and bankers enjoying impunity, at a time when real wages continued to stagnate – is among the key factors in explaining the backlash against globalisation, particularly in advanced economies, and the erosion of trust in government and other institutions,” Lagarde wrote.

According to Lagarde, the world now faces new fractures, including the potential rollback of post-crisis financial regulations, the fallout from excessive inequality, protectionism and rising global imbalances. How we respond to these new challenges will establish whether the lessons of the collapse of Lehman Brothers have truly been learned. “In this sense, the true legacy of the crisis cannot be adequately assessed after 10 years – because it is still being written,” Lagarde wrote.

One key area that Lagarde stressed still needed more work was gender diversity. A key ingredient of reform is putting more female leadership in finance to reduce groupthink and increase prudence. She said: “A higher share of women on the boards of banks and financial supervision agencies is associated with greater stability. As I have said many times, if it had been Lehman Sisters rather than Lehman Brothers, the world might well look a lot different today.”

But despite making up 47 percent of the labour force, women are still underrepresented at the highest ranks of business, including at Davos. The number of women attending Davos is low, but it continues to grow. In 2017, women made up about 20 percent of attendees, compared with 18 percent in 2016 and 17 percent the year before. The WEF’s 2018 meeting also featured an all-female panel of co-chairs. “Finally a real panel, not a ‘manel’,” Lagarde said at the time.

The #MeToo movement, which encourages people to speak out about sexual harassment, began in late 2017, and at Davos 2018 dozens of panels addressed gender, diversity and inclusion, while two focused specifically on sexual harassment. Although it began in the film industry, #MeToo continued to send shockwaves through numerous sectors around the world in 2018.

The right direction
These important topics are just a few examples of what will take centre stage at Davos 2019, but many other important issues will also fight for recognition.

The debate around the effects of the climate crisis – and how the world should respond to them – has been a prominent feature of previous meetings in Davos. After a deluge of extreme weather events shook the globe in 2018 and a number of cities and countries began to crack down on single-use plastics, progress towards decarbonisation should continue to gain momentum in 2019.

Despite making up 47 percent of the labour force, women are still underrepresented at the highest ranks of business

Another area of progress in 2018 was ongoing denuclearisation and peace talks between North and South Korea. The leaders of the two nations met for just the third time in 11 years in April, and Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, entered the South’s territory for the first time since the end of the Korean War in 1953.

Kim also met with Trump in June – the first time sitting leaders of the two nations had ever met. But while they signed a joint statement to work towards denuclearisation and rebuild bilateral relations, the agreement was shrouded in uncertainty as both sides have since derided one another, with Kim accusing the Trump administration of “gangster-like” behaviour.

While there were encouraging efforts by world leaders to attempt to repair fissures in global relations in 2018, there is still a huge amount of work to be done. Technology has made us more connected than ever, but it has also amplified the scale of many of the problems we face. Now, it is increasingly important for the WEF to stick to its mission to improve the state of the world by reinforcing unity across the globe.

The Brightline Initiative is closing the gap between strategy design and delivery

Organisations the world over – from public and private businesses to non-profits and government agencies – are now grappling with the effects of disruptive technologies. According to recent research from the Project Management Institute (PMI), 91 percent of organisations are feeling the impact. Meanwhile, those few that aren’t currently experiencing the effects are still preparing for disruptive technologies to change their business in the coming years.

The importance of active and visible leadership can’t be overstated

“Our research reports that organisations are investing in and expanding their capabilities in cloud computing, the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence, among other technologies,” said Cindy Anderson, Vice President of Brand Management at PMI. PMI leads Brightline Initiative, a coalition that creates resources to assist executives in bridging the gap between strategy design and delivery. “Organisations don’t have to be hi-tech or digital to recognise that they can effectively leverage disruptive technologies to give them a competitive advantage, like improving the customer experience, enhancing efficiency and shortening project timelines.”

A great example of this is Caterpillar, the world’s leading manufacturer of construction and mining equipment, diesel and natural gas engines, industrial gas turbines, and diesel-electric locomotives. At present, the company is using self-driving, autonomous machines in mining operations in Australia in a bid to reinvent itself, going from a maker of heavy machinery to an IoT-connected company. Another example is TD Bank, which is working with other banks in Canada to develop an identity verification service using blockchain in order to stave off disruption from fintech companies.

Tackling disruption
While these organisations are disrupting from within, others are being disrupted by external forces. In fact, a recent study by PricewaterhouseCoopers found that 56 percent of CEOs expect disruption to come from outside the organisation. “We think of Amazon as the disruptor-in-chief,” said Anderson. “Whether it’s in the grocery industry, with its purchase of Whole Foods Market, or the pharmacy industry, with its recent acquisition of PillPack, Amazon shows how overwhelming and far-reaching disruption can be – and how unlikely the source may be, too.”

It’s important to acknowledge that strategy delivery is just as critical as strategy design

This wave of disruption – whether external or self-imposed – calls for organisations to assess their business models, design new strategies, leverage new technologies and rely on the successful implementation of the projects that will drive the needed change. It also shines a harsh light on the gap between strategy design and strategy implementation. Essentially, even though forward-thinking organisations recognise that disruptive technologies can help them gain a competitive advantage, many of them still struggle to implement the strategies at the scope and speed the market demands.

This correlates with a recent Brightline Initiative study conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, which reported that 59 percent of senior executives admitted their organisations struggle to bridge the strategy-implementation gap. The research also showed that only one in 10 organisations is effectively achieving its strategic goals. “Turning ideas into reality is no easy feat,” Anderson told World Finance. “As we’ve conducted research and spoken to leaders in a variety of industries, we hear persistent concerns about an organisation’s inability to close the gap between strategy design and delivery.”

There are numerous reasons for this chasm (see Fig 1). Indeed, Anderson acknowledged that one is a failure to recognise that strategy is delivered through projects and programmes. This then leads to the absence of accountability and a persistent disconnect between those who design strategy and those who implement it. “Too often, senior leadership see themselves as responsible only for the vision,” she explained. “They think that delivery is a tactical problem and don’t give it the attention it needs and deserves.”

The costs associated with the strategy implementation gap are enormous, and aren’t measured solely in financial terms. PMI research shows that every 20 seconds, $1m is wasted globally due to the poor implementation of strategy, which amounts to almost $5bn wasted every day, or $2trn a year – approximately the same size as Brazil’s GDP. “These aren’t losses merely in profit and revenues,” Anderson pointed out. “This also results in the destruction of the value that these organisations could be providing to society at large.”

Fortunately, not all organisations struggle: there are various organisations that have proved themselves effective in delivering the strategies they have designed. Research conducted by Brightline has identified three common characteristics among them. One that is they ensure that strategy design and delivery are deeply interconnected: instead of a linear two-step process, they maintain continuous interaction between the team that creates a strategic plan and the team that carries it out.

Second, they understand that the effective delivery of strategy requires looking beyond the walls of their organisation. They don’t just monitor what happens in the market – they provide such insights to the decision-makers who can quickly adjust strategy and implementation in response. Finally, these organisations find a balance between short-term responsiveness and long-term vision. Leading companies create a dynamic system for delivering strategy, moving quickly to adjust their approach based on changing opportunities and risks, all while keeping the larger goal in sight.

The guidelines
In light of these findings, a group of experts, practitioners and researchers supported by the Brightline team developed the 10 Guiding Principles to help more organisations shrink the gap between strategy design and delivery. “If we can close that gap, organisations will save money and stop destroying economic value, and instead focus on creating additional value,” said Anderson. “The Brightline principles have universal applicability: they address specific actions that organisations and their leaders can take regarding strategy design and implementation.”
First, Anderson explained, it’s important to acknowledge that strategy delivery is just as critical as strategy design. “Strategy delivery doesn’t just happen automatically once it is designed,” she told World Finance. “It is an essential part of a senior executive’s role to ensure that his or her organisation has the programme delivery capability needed to implement that strategy.”

91%

of organisations are feeling the impact of disruptive technology

56%

of CEOs expect disruption to come from outside a company

59%

of senior executives say their organisations struggle to implement strategy

94%

of executives say they face challenges when trying to create a culture of change

38%

of executives say employees see change as a threat to their jobs

If an organisation invests substantial resources, creative time and energy in designing the right strategy, it makes sense to give equal priority and attention to delivering it. The importance of active and visible leadership can’t be overstated. Anderson added: “Even if you’re tired of talking and thinking about the strategy before the rest of the organisation is ready to implement it, bear in mind that if you don’t demonstrate the appropriate level of interest, no one else will.”

Next, it’s necessary for project players to accept that they are accountable for delivering the strategy they designed. Once the strategy has been defined and clearly communicated, responsibility shifts to overseeing the progress of implementation so that the strategy delivers results and achieves its goals. The responsibility applies to the entire senior team, Anderson explained, because the orchestration required to succeed in today’s business environment is highly complex.

Accountability means knowing where change happens in the organisation and who manages the programmes that drive the change. This includes proactively addressing emerging gaps and challenges that may impact delivery. “Never underestimate the power of entropy,” Anderson said.

Brightline’s third principle involves the dedication and mobilisation of the right resources. According to Anderson, there needs to be an active balance between running the business and changing the business, which are both achieved by selecting and securing the right resources for each. The specific skills needed are often different. Team leadership skills are at a premium, so the best leaders should be assigned to the most important projects.

“A critical part of mobilising resources is not just assigning them, but inspiring them,” said Anderson. Therefore, organisations need to ensure that both senior leaders and employees are committed if they want big-change projects to take root. Visible backing and action from the most influential senior leaders and their direct reports are vital to inspiring a buy-in from those on the front lines. Late or inconsistent communication with staff can alienate the people most affected by change, so senior leaders should communicate with staff early and often.

Anderson continued: “Of course, before you can dedicate and mobilise resources, it’s essential to know what resources you have.” She also pointed out that NASA, which deals with change and complex issues on a regular basis, assesses its talent pool based on both current and anticipated needs, and keeps track of who possesses which skill sets. Adopting this tactic can help senior leaders understand if they have the right resources as needed, or if additional resources will be required when change is implemented.

Seeking feedback
Leveraging insight from customers and competitors is another key strategy; continuously monitoring customer needs, collecting competitor analysis and tracking the market landscape are all critical. Brightline research shows that top organisations adopt feedback loops in which information from customers and competitors can be acted upon. “Advantage in the market flows to those who excel at gaining new insights from an ever-changing business environment and quickly respond with the right decisions and adjustments to both strategy design and delivery,” noted Anderson. “Too often, companies forget to look from the outside in. It’s not easy to do, but it’s essential for the kind of change that leads to growth.”

Being bold, staying focused and keeping things as simple as possible is crucial

In the absence of these practices, many strategic initiatives fail because leaders have become so passionate about an idea that they lose sight of how the market is evolving. Strategy may be delivered, but the result could be something that the market no longer wants or needs.

Being bold, staying focused and keeping things as simple as possible is crucial, because many of the delivery challenges will be complex and interdependent. As Anderson explained, it is important to remain nimble by making sure there are enough simplifiers, rather than complicators. “Simplifiers are those people who can get to the core of an opportunity or threat, understand the drivers, deliver the information and take the action that keeps the strategy moving forward,” she told World Finance. This approach minimises bureaucracy and instead allows for the exploration of ideas, taking appropriate risks, prioritising work, ensuring accountability and focusing on delivering value.

$1m

Amount wasted globally every 20 seconds due to poor strategy implementation

$5bn

Amount wasted globally every day due to poor strategy implementation

$2trn

Amount wasted globally every year due to poor strategy implementation

After this comes the principle of promoting team engagement and effective cross-business cooperation. “Beware of the frozen middle,” Anderson said. “Senior leadership needs to gain genuine buy-in from middle and line managers – the people who run the business – by engaging, activating and empowering them as strategy champions.” It’s a common mistake for senior leadership to rely too heavily on traditional managers and supervisors, who might be given responsibility or assumed to be playing a certain role only because of their title, rather than sharing and dividing responsibility between those who are respected by their peers for other reasons.

When necessary, teams can break down silos, add diversity to the creative process and generate responsiveness that creates more value than what individuals could create on their own. Care must be taken to craft teams – whether from internal or external talent pools – with the right mix of capabilities and skill sets, while the conditions that allow people to work collectively as well as individually must be explicitly set. “Where appropriate, give the right individuals the authority to make decisions and drive execution on their own,” Anderson told World Finance.

In establishing a shared commitment to strategy delivery priorities and regularly reinforcing that commitment, there is no room for subtlety. What’s more, governing through transparency can engender trust and enhance cross-business cooperation in delivery. “The highest-performing organisations don’t have silos separating those who design strategy from those who carry it out,” Anderson said. “On the contrary, they collaborate very closely together.”

Being self-aware
Demonstrating bias towards decision-making and owning the decisions made are both crucial. Making decisions isn’t enough; follow-through is needed all the way to delivery. One way to do this is to build a lean and powerful governance structure to reinforce accountability, ownership and a bias towards action, based upon pre-agreed metrics and milestones. “That means committing to making strategic decisions rapidly, moving quickly to course correct, reprioritising and removing roadblocks,” said Anderson.

It’s likely that leaders will not have all the information they would like, which means they have to rely on others to deliver reliable input. In turn, this will enable them to make thoughtful decisions. During this process, risks and interdependencies must be considered and addressed explicitly – both upfront and regularly throughout delivery. When leaders act fast and with discipline, they encourage prompt and effective reallocations of funding and personnel among strategic initiatives, as well as rapid adjustment when implementation reveals new risks and opportunities.

Number eight of Brightline’s Guiding Principles is to check ongoing initiatives before committing to new ones: it’s critical that senior leadership resists the temptation of declaring victory too soon. “Change fatigue affects even the most senior and seasoned executives,” Anderson explained, noting that with the right governance, leadership, rigour and reporting capabilities in place, regular evaluation of the organisation’s project portfolio can help maintain focus and discipline.

Implementing new initiatives in response to fresh opportunities should only occur when there is a clear understanding of the existing portfolio and the organisation’s capacity to deliver change, together with the assurance that those initiatives are aligned with the strategy. Any issues that are discovered must be actively addressed. In the long term, strategic initiative management discipline – which is critical for the effective orchestration of a dynamic initiative portfolio – will only work if robust assessment, support and course correction are all in place.

Another principle Anderson explained involves the development of robust plans while also allowing for missteps to occur – essentially, failing fast to learn fast. “Learn to reward failure, or at least accept it as valuable input,” she added. In today’s business environment, strategy planning cycles need to be more nimble than ever. This means empowering programme delivery teams to learn in an environment where it is safe to experiment with products and processes that might better meet customers’ needs. “If what you’re working on doesn’t meet your customers’ needs, which means it doesn’t meet your strategic needs, stop doing it, learn from it and move on to the next thing.”

According to Anderson, one organisation that performs this principle exceptionally well is the American Red Cross. Due to the nature of its work in the wake of emergencies, quick decisions have to be made – however, not all fast decisions yield positive results. For this reason, the Red Cross encourages employees to learn from their mistakes, discuss challenges openly and accept failure as a valuable part of strategy implementation. “If you make a decision and it’s the wrong one, course correct really quickly,” advised American Red Cross President and CEO Gail McGovern in a Forbes Insights case study. “I have seen more leaders just stick to their strategy and fail because they don’t want to admit they made a mistake.”

After a project failure at the Red Cross, details are carefully dissected by team members and mined for valuable insights. McGovern told Forbes Insights: “We are really proud of the fact that we’re a learning organisation. After every disaster, you should see our conference room. We just whiteboard every single lesson learned and what we’re going to do differently the next time.”

Last but not least is the 10th principle: celebrating success and recognising those who have done good work. As leaders get involved in the day-to-day work associated with strategic initiatives, they may overlook the importance of taking the time to acknowledge people and their contributions. “The simple act of writing a thank you note can have a big impact,” Anderson told World Finance. “I set aside time every week on my calendar to do this, to ensure that this critical last step doesn’t fall by the wayside.” She has also observed that word gets around when senior leadership shows that kind of interest and appreciation.

Equally important is generous and public acknowledgement of those who demonstrate the leadership behaviours and programme delivery capabilities that make a strategy succeed. Asking them to share their experiences motivates and educates everyone and pays off exponentially.

The People Manifesto
As a complement to its 10 principles, Brightline also developed the People Manifesto. “People are the essential link between strategy design and delivery; they turn ideas into reality,” Anderson explained. “They are the strategy in motion.” But at the same time, people are frequently the most misunderstood and least-leveraged asset, Anderson said: “While the principles do address issues related to talent, the People Manifesto crystallises some fresh and even contrarian insights about behaviour, leadership and culture that can help to either mitigate or manage some of the issues that can stall or inhibit strategy implementation.”

In today’s business environment, strategy planning cycles need to be more nimble than ever

Just as the human element makes change possible, it can also make the process of strategy delivery messy and complicated. People have different interests, motivators and levels of tolerance, which influences their behaviour and can create potential misalignment. In fact, according to research carried out by Forbes Insights, 94 percent of those surveyed said they face challenges when trying to create a culture of change. Meanwhile, 38 percent of respondents said employees see change as too much of a threat and even fear losing their jobs.

The fear is not unfounded: a study by the McKinsey Global Institute estimates that between 400 million and 800 million of today’s jobs will be automated by 2030. “Change is often processed internally, and even subconsciously, as a threat; the response to that may well be irrational,” Anderson said. “New strategies almost always require different ways of working, so leaders must recognise that both time and effort are needed to shift individuals’ interests, mindsets and behaviours.”

For instance, international staffing company ManpowerGroup prioritises open communication across its firm to make the value of new technologies clear to the very people who will be affected by them. With AI, the benefits of automating customer conversations are emphasised – specifically, contact centre agents are freed up to focus on more mission-critical tasks.

Even when people are convinced that changes are in the collective interest, their individual behaviours may not align if the personal cost of change seems too great. “Management needs to look out for entrenched behaviours and create the conditions needed to make change individually desirable, all the while ensuring it aligns with the broader interest,” said Anderson.

It is also essential for leaders to treat their teams with respect, while remaining explicit and resolute about the consequences of not participating in the new behaviours or reverting to old ways of working. Not everyone will be able to make the necessary changes, but it is in management’s best interest to try and get everyone on board.

As such, senior leaders need to engage and activate the extended leadership team, speaking with one voice to model the new target behaviours. That said, those accustomed to leading must be prepared to follow when appropriate. Anderson explained: “We’re conditioned to believe that to be valued, we always have to lead, but there is also a time and a place to follow.”

“Leaders need followers to be successful. Make follower-ship a valued behaviour and let people know that just as it’s OK for people who don’t traditionally lead to do so, it’s also OK that some people will never lead. But their contributions should be valued as well.”

Creating the conditions that allow both leaders and followers to flourish during strategy implementation may require a cultural shift. “It also requires the recognition that culture must not only support strategy, but – like strategy – it must be dynamic and constantly evolving. While culture cannot be built per se, aided by blueprints or checklists, it also can’t be left to chance,” said Anderson. “The intricacy of culture is that it is a living organism made from the collective tension of individuals’ behaviours and responses. Navigating that tension in an increasingly complex and changing environment depends on a shared sense of purpose and trust among employees.”

Emerging opportunities
The advancement of the Brightline Initiative’s 10 Guiding Principles and its People Manifesto coincides with significant changes for project professionals – those at the centre of strategy implementation. Indeed, both can help executives understand how to best leverage the key talent that project professionals represent.

People are frequently the most misunderstood and least-leveraged asset

According to Forbes Insights, executives believe that the implementation of a well-designed strategy depends on smart technology choices and project management prowess. “The strategy-implementation gap creates tremendous opportunity for the profession,” Anderson told World Finance. “We’re already seeing a growing demand for skilled project managers, as they are more frequently being recognised as the people who take ideas and turn them into reality.”

The emphasis on strategy, technology and leadership skills at the organisational level mirrors what PMI has found to be essential in sourcing project management talent: a combination of technical, leadership, strategic and business management skills, known as the PMI Talent Triangle. Anderson noted it is increasingly important that project managers have the ability to learn and keep pace with technology: “Today, due to fast-moving technological advances, the traditional Talent Triangle skillsets include an overlay of digital-age skills.”

The recognition of the importance of project management skills for successful strategy implementation marks a significant shift in C-suite thinking, according to Anderson. Previous PMI evidence (both quantitative and qualitative) has found that executives did not tend to focus sufficiently on the opportunities and capabilities that project management skills represent. Indeed, people with such skills often support and even embrace frequent change, thereby better positioning themselves and the organisations they work for to compete and succeed in a fast-paced, disruptive business environment.

The talent evolution
Another significant change for the profession is how project leaders are perceived and deployed within organisations. Project leaders are taking on roles that demand greater accountability, not just around traditional areas such as budget, timelines and resources, but around the full delivery landscape. Their role is expanding to that of an innovator, a strategic advisor, a communicator and a versatile manager.

Anderson explained that titles are evolving as well. “We see project managers, team leaders, scrum masters and product owners, delivery, implementation and change managers, and transformation leads, among others,” she said. “We also see the lead project role morphing from project manager to project lead – and even project executive in some organisations.”

While this new vocabulary reflects the expanded and essential role these professionals play in managing during disruption, focus should ultimately be kept on the process and the end result. “It doesn’t matter whether the activity is called a project or a change or a strategy, or whether the method is called management or innovation or implementation,” said Anderson. “At the end of the day, someone is always going to have an idea and someone else is always going to have to make that idea a reality.”

For organisations to win at disruption, executives must learn to manage the influx and influence of disruptive technologies, and must invest in the relevant talent. No organisation can prepare for each and every eventuality, but they can sharpen their ability to respond to the inevitable challenges that arise as they implement what they thought was a well-constructed strategic plan.

And while organisations may be able to articulate their strategy for dealing with disruptive technologies, doing so will be meaningless if they fall short when it comes to executing against that strategy.

Romer’s endogenous growth theory could provide a solution for global problems

There are some theories that make so much sense – that provide such elucidation on a topic – that it’s as though they’ve always existed. They almost feel obvious. Of course, this is never actually the case – it takes that one person to make the discovery and put pen to paper in the first place. Endogenous growth theory is a fine example of that.

Romer’s work contrasts with neoclassical growth theories that argue that factors affecting growth are exogenous

The man behind it, Professor Paul Romer, is the latest winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. He won the prestigious award alongside fellow economist Professor William Nordhaus. The pair received the SEK 9m ($1m) prize for integrating technological innovation and climate change into macroeconomic analysis – Romer being responsible for the former, Nordhaus for the latter.

Investing in growth
First published in 1990, Romer’s work contrasts with neoclassical growth theories that argue that factors affecting growth are exogenous – or, in other words, factors that occur outside of an economy. As internal forces cannot influence growth – nor technological progress, for that matter – the work of policymakers essentially becomes ineffective.

Governments keen to ignite growth may seek solutions such as tax cuts and investment subsidies. But the process of capital deepening (increasing capital per worker) eventually leads to diminishing returns. To put it simply, giving an employee a second computer does not double their output. This long-standing theory can be attributed to Robert Solow’s 1956 paper A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth, which saw him win a Nobel Prize in 1987.

Though previous theories highlighted the importance of technological innovation as a primary driver for growth, Solow and others did not take into account how market conditions and economic decisions affect the creation of new technology in the first place. Neither did Solow manage to explain how technological progress could be accelerated.

Romer’s work, however, resolves this problem by demonstrating that internal factors can indeed influence the willingness of governments and companies to invest in innovation, which in turn drives economic growth.

Dr Maurice Kugler, a professor of public policy at George Mason University, explained its impact: “Endogenous growth theory [has] facilitated the analysis of the deep determinants of long-run prosperity across societies that go beyond markets and economic policies. It has been possible to incorporate both the structural determinants of economic interactions as well as public policy more generally beyond the economic dimension.”

He added: “Endogenous growth theory has included the study of why poverty traps can emerge, how growth take-offs happen, what determines whether a country’s growth trajectory converges or diverges relative to other economies, how are ‘convergence clubs’ shaped, and so on. Not all of these phenomena can be characterised in the context of traditional neoclassical or exogenous growth models.”

People first
At the heart of endogenous growth theory are people, as they best drive growth through new ideas. As Kugler told World Finance: “Knowledge is the basis of economic growth through the ongoing introduction of productivity-enhancing general-purpose technologies (e.g. electricity, personal computers, the internet, smartphones, robots, etc.).” The enhancement of human capital is therefore key for the pursuit of technical knowledge to drive sustainable, long-term economic growth.

Greater investment into research and development (R&D), together with incentives for businesses and budding entrepreneurs, are likewise essential. Kugler added: “Aside from science policy, there are other important factors shaping the pace of scientific discovery and its transformation into technological change. Those factors go further than policies that directly impact the rate of return to R&D investments – such as tax rates, labour regulations, immigration restrictions, corruption, and so on – but also more entrenched structures shaping economic interactions, such as political institutions and rules, preferences, social norms and culture.”

Essentially, governmental policies can raise competition, which in turn spurs further innovation and accelerates economic growth as a result. Encouraging entrepreneurship also has the added benefit of prompting job creation and further investment.

“Romer built a formal economic model in which technological change was the outcome of intentional investments by economic agents rather than being the by-product of (physical or human) capital investment through a serendipitous externality called ‘knowledge spillovers’,” Kugler told World Finance. “He showed that the profitability of investments in R&D leading to new ideas and innovations hinges on the enforcement of intellectual property rights or the possibility of trade secrecy.”

Kugler explained that when the economic agents pouring investment into R&D do not benefit from the profits that stem from their innovation, new technologies would stop and economic growth would falter. “For example, encrypting technology or limited access platforms to charge user fees could make some innovations partially excludable. Also, rules introduced by governments could limit imitation that left inventors unrewarded. Indeed, the function of intellectual property right protections, such as patents, is to provide inventors with incentives to innovate and propel technological change.”

Non-rivalry ideas
Economies have managed to maintain accelerated growth over time, in part due to population growth. Simply, there are more people participating in “discovery activity” (as Romer puts it). More important, however, are the changes in institutions, such as universities, patent laws and research grants, which create more incentives for individuals to make discoveries.

“It’s an idea that helps us get better at discovering ideas,” said Romer during an interview with Russ Roberts for EconTalk in 2007. “When we essentially invented the modern research university with the creation of the land-grant university system in the United States with the Morrill Land-Grant Acts in 1862, we created a whole new idea-discovering system with these universities that were focused on very practical problem-solving tasks rather than abstract, ivory-tower examination of the classics.”

When economies keep adding more of the same – or, in other words, they keep investing in physical capital – they may encourage growth for a period, but they soon run into diminishing returns. This is why it is crucial to continue discovering new ideas. The next question, though is whether this is possible – with more ideas, does it become easier to continue discovering, or harder?

And this is the best bit: according to endogenous growth theory, ideas are non-rivalry. “As we learn more, it’s getting easier to discover new things, so somehow knowledge is building on itself,” Romer told Roberts. Ideas are different to material goods in many ways. They do not require specific conditions in order to thrive in the market. Neither do new ideas suffer from diminishing returns – in fact, they enjoy increasing returns to scale. Though expensive to produce at first, they are cheap, or even costless, to reproduce countless times.

As Kugler explained: “An idea (or blueprint) can be utilised by many economic agents at once without impeding the possibility of potentially unbounded additional users. This endows ideas with a natural property to generate aggregate non-decreasing returns to scale (constant, rather than increasing, to obtain balanced growth).”

Take the internet – one idea that has spawned a million others. Using the internet as the basis for innovation doesn’t diminish as more innovation transpires. The very opposite: it’s a cycle that feeds upon itself, culminating positively, unlike any type of material good. As Romer said to EconTalk: “The more we know, the easier it gets to discover.”

The stats show this theory in action. According to a 2016 study by the World Bank, for every 10 percent increase in broadband speed, GDP growth increases by 1.38 percent in developing countries, and by 1.21 percent in developed economies. As this example shows, creating an environment in which innovation is encouraged can have untold consequences for an economy and the society that lives within it. Whether it’s developing new medicines, creating new technology to reduce our carbon footprint or improving communication systems, Romer says, we can solve the world’s biggest problems at an accelerated pace using endogenous growth theory.

Kugler told World Finance: “Endogenous growth theory will continue playing a role in the expansion of the frontier of knowledge on the determinants of long-run prosperity from a macroeconomic perspective, and of the process of economic development through catch-up growth. The theory highlights the need for R&D investments to be profitable for technological change to generate productivity growth. In the future, beyond the role of intellectual property right policy to boost innovation, it would be important to explore how different public policy options could be a catalyst to industry-level associations for private sector innovation. These options encompass industry cooperation schemes, including consortia with universities, to overcome collective action barriers.”

As explained by Kugler, this will require collective action in the form of multiple players advocating R&D, creating incentives, investing in people and innovation, paying good wages, providing education for all, and sharing discoveries, all the while maintaining competitive, well-regulated markets. In such a space, ideas can flourish – and, as a result, so can we all.

China’s trade surplus with US hits record high

China’s US trade surplus hit a record high of $323bn in 2018, the highest in more than a decade, according to figures released by the country’s General Administration of Customs on January 14. This figure marks a 17 percent increase in the surplus from 2017, and is the largest since records began in 2006.

China’s large trade surplus with the US has been a source of contention between the two countries for some time

While China’s exports to the US rose 11.3 percent from the previous year, imports from the US to China rose a measly 0.7 percent in 2018. Both imports and exports fell radically in December, by 7.6 percent and 4.4 percent respectively, signalling a cooling of trade in the final month of 2018 that may have increased the overall annual surplus substantially.

China’s large trade surplus with the US has been a source of contention between the two countries for some time, with Washington demanding that Beijing takes steps to reduce it considerably. The Trump administration imposed a series of tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods last year, to which China retaliated with tariffs of its own.

While the Chinese economy remained surprisingly resilient to these tariffs over the course of 2018, it appears the restrictions finally began to bite in December, driving US exports down 3.5 percent and imports down a whopping 35.8 percent.

The on-going conflict between the US and China over trade, together with a slowdown in China’s domestic economy, has already begun to affect some US companies that rely on China for parts and labour. For instance, Apple announced on January 8 that it would cut its production plans for new iPhones by around 10 percent over the next few months, citing lower than expected sales in China. It also slashed its revenue forecast to $84bn, down from the $93bn figure it had previously projected.

China’s domestic market is also showing signs of a slowdown, a source of concern for businesses across the globe that trade with the Asian country. Louis Kuijs, head of Asia economics at Oxford Economics, told Reuters: “[China’s] overall economic growth slowed further in the fourth quarter and remains under pressure from weaker exports, slow credit growth and cooling real estate activity.”

Nevertheless, these factors have not yet had a substantial effect on China’s other worldwide trade relationships, as demonstrated by overall end-of-year data. China’s global trade surplus for 2018 was $351.76bn, the lowest since 2013, despite the fact that export growth was the highest since 2011, according to Reuters. Overall exports rose 9.9 percent from 2017, while imports grew 15.8 percent over the same period. Analysts, however, are predicting that this positive growth is unlikely to continue for much longer unless a rapid resolution between the world’s two largest economies is reached. With China’s internal economy already grappling with a slowdown, it simply cannot afford any additional pressure.

Proexca continues to bolster the Canary Islands’ thriving business milieu

Although the Canary Islands have one of the most favourable tax systems in Europe, they are not a tax haven, which means the local economy has to sustain real businesses and jobs. As a result of their location on the outermost edge of the EU, the islands receive regular funding to compensate for their distance to continental Europe. This helps to encourage private investment and economic development.

Despite their location and size, the Canary Islands have managed to attract world-class companies to their shores

The compensation received is detailed within the Canary Islands Economic and Tax Regime, which falls under Spanish legislation and is fully sanctioned and reviewed by the EU. Further incentives are provided by the Canary Islands Special Zone – known as ZEC – which allows companies to pay just four percent corporate income tax (see Fig 1). There are also tax deductions for foreign film productions of up to 40 percent, plus 45 to 90 percent on research and development (R&D) and technology-related activities. Also, the average indirect tax rate in the Canary Islands is just seven percent, as opposed to Spanish VAT, which is 21 percent.

Despite their location and size, the Canary Islands have managed to attract strategic investments and world-class companies to their shores. This is partly a result of the aforementioned tax environment, but it is also thanks to the hard work of companies like Proexca, a publicly owned company that aims to strengthen the Canarian business network. World Finance spoke with Pablo Martin Carbajal, CEO of Proexca, about the reasons why businesses and individuals are choosing to invest in the Canary Islands.

Islands of innovation
The tax incentives offered by the Canary Islands can provide a huge boost to businesses, particularly those in the innovation and technology sector, which can struggle with profitability in their early days. Technological development is one of the islands’ main priorities and is supported by Canarian public and private organisations.

“We have major infrastructure, such as business parks linked to Canarian universities and technological institutes of international excellence, like the European Northern Observatory at the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, the Oceanic Platform of the Canary Islands and similar organisations operating in the field of renewable energy,” Carbajal explained. “In addition, the blue economy is gaining importance, with technologies related to renewable energy, underwater robotics, biotechnology and algae research becoming more sophisticated.”

A combination of factors has led the Canary Islands to host a number of well-known companies and tech start-ups. Having internationally renowned R&D centres to test prototypes certainly helps, as does the plentiful supply of well-qualified personnel, powerful tax incentives and lower costs compared with continental Europe. This has helped create an ecosystem that is conducive to technological evolution.

“We recently installed the first offshore fixed-bottom wind turbine in Southern Europe, which was built using an innovative technology that makes it unique in the world and commercially competitive,” Carbajal said. “We also have the hydroelectric power station on the island of El Hierro, the first one globally that generates electrical energy self-sufficiently from renewable sources, such as water and wind. Over the next 20 years, the station will offset 19,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide and provide power to El Hierro’s inhabitants, while preserving the island’s beautiful natural environment.”

The Canary Islands’ list of technological achievements goes on. The Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias has helped develop state-of-the-art optical technology that, aside from its astrophysical use, is applied in other fields, like medicine. The islands are also pioneers in water desalination and treatment; across the entire archipelago, a thriving ecosystem of technology start-ups is emerging.

Quality of life and talent
Of course, a thriving business environment also needs talented members of staff. Before setting up on the Canary Islands, organisations often have questions regarding the role that local universities play in technological development, how R&D is progressing and how talent pools vary by industry.

“One of the main questions that companies ask us when they are considering the Canary Islands is: will we be able to find the talent we need here?” Carbajal said. “The answer to this question is becoming more important than taxes, living costs and legal issues. The war for talent is certainly fierce, but the Canary Islands have a clear advantage – people love living here. More importantly, people who move here don’t want to leave, meaning that talent retention is rarely an issue.”

Some businesses need no further convincing of the Canary Islands’ labour force. Recently, a well-known tech company opened an international Spanish-speaking customer service centre in a South American capital city. It was attracted mainly by the availability of talent at a very competitive cost. Unfortunately, the high labour rotation in that city made it unsustainable to keep the centre there, and the Canary Islands were immediately identified as a great alternative, largely due to their extremely low labour rotation rate (the lowest in Spain). The small difference in labour costs compared with South America was compensated by lower training costs and, most of all, the higher-quality service provided by more stable workers.

“Our ability to retain talent is primarily driven by the fantastic quality of life we offer,” Carbajal said. “This is not only driven by our mild weather – arguably one of the best climates in the world – but by the quality of our infrastructure, the affordable cost of living, transport, internet connectivity to the rest of the globe and, last but not least, security. The Canary Islands are one of the safest places on the planet.”

This mixture of sunshine and safety has not only enticed new businesses to the islands – tourists also flock there in their droves. In fact, the Canary Islands welcome more than 15 million foreign tourists every year.

“Our unique natural conditions, excellent connectivity, first-rate services and well-developed infrastructure all contribute to creating an environment that is treasured by locals and visitors alike,” Carbajal said. “Tourism is thriving on the islands, but it is far from the only industry that is doing well.”

Other strategic sectors are growing rapidly in the Canaries, including naval repair and offshore services, outsourcing, IT, share services, trading, call centres, renewable energy, biotechnology and film production. In addition, the Canary Islands act as a service hub for Africa, with the shortest distance between the islands and the continent being around 115km.

Spreading the word
Thanks to the spectacular development of the tourism sector across the Canary Islands, there has been parallel economic growth of other activities. Maritime connections are well developed, easing the transportation of goods and people. Similarly, air connections consist of six international airports that allow the islands to accept some 2,800 direct connections per week from 157 airports in 29 countries. For instance, the islands boast direct flights to 23 UK airports – more than Barcelona, with 17 airports, or Madrid, with 13.

Tourism also helps to create a cosmopolitan atmosphere, with people of many different nationalities setting up home on the islands. This in turn has led to the construction of several international or bilingual schools. In addition, local institutions are committed to diversifying the economy so that it supports a variety of different sectors.

The Canary Islands, with their unique advantages, fulfil all the conditions required to become a strong business hub. All that needs to be done now is for the islands to market themselves better to investors and corporate leaders. “We need to let the world hear about us and get to know us, not only as a place for tourists but also for being islands with great potential for businesses,” Carbajal said.

Although the islands have had a great deal of success, businesses and government officials remain committed to further improvement. “We are continually improving connectivity and putting emphasis on the development of all the sectors where we offer a competitive advantage or added value,” Carbajal explained. “These include IT, film production, naval repairs, and the blue economy – among others. As part of our developing relationship with Africa, companies working in the west of the continent often use the islands as a base for their service centres and make use of our logistics, health, business and training services.”

The rise of the digital economy has meant that often businesses no longer need to be located close to their customers, which has resulted in areas having to work harder than ever to attract best-in-class companies. The Canary Islands have shown that size needn’t be a barrier to business success, especially as they are home to just over two million people.

Investing more in marketing will help ensure that the Canaries are properly recognised for their business achievements. Those who are not aware of this side of the islands are amazed when they learn about it. The local residents and businesses that are based there already, however, know all too well that the Canary Islands are about much more than sun, sea and sangria.

Top 5 countries with the largest fiscal deficits

According to the CIA’s World Factbook estimates for 2017, only 47 out of 222 countries worldwide are not in a fiscal deficit. The 2008 global financial crisis must take some of the blame for this, particularly in the developed world, but other factors are also at play.

Although the crisis caused debt to skyrocket in many EU countries, the deficit figures posted by these nations are not among the world’s largest. Instead, the following list is occupied with states that have found themselves geographically isolated, ravaged by war or under the jackboot of authoritarian rule.

1 – Timor-Leste (75.7% of GDP)
Sitting on the eastern tip of Timor Island, Timor-Leste (or East Timor) is a little-known nation that lies just under 600km from Australia’s northern coast. Following an often-violent 25-year occupation by Indonesia, in 2002, Timor-Leste became the first new sovereign state to be recognised by the United Nations in the 21stcentury.

The economic outlook was promising in the initial years following independence, with GDP growth rates hitting 64.1 percent in 2004. However, since 2012, development has proved to be wildly inconsistent, with the economy contracting 26 percent in 2014, before expanding 20.9 percent the following year. With estimated revenues of just $300m compared to $2.4bn of expenditure, the World Factbook recorded Timor-Leste’s deficit at 75.7 percent of GDP in 2017.

2 – Kiribati (64.1% of GDP)
Located in the heart of the Pacific Ocean, the Republic of Kiribati is one of the world’s most geographically isolated countries. Consisting of 32 atolls and a solitary raised coral island, Kiribati is considered one of the world’s least developed countries. With the island’s scarce resources virtually exhausted by the time it declared independence from the United Kingdom in 1979, today its economy relies primarily on fishing exports and foreign aid, while its dependence on imports has resulted in a substantial trade deficit. Although GDP growth has remained steady, the country’s eye-watering deficit of 64.1 percent provides substantial concern.

3 – Venezuela (46.1% of GDP)
The downfall of Venezuela has been widely documented. A crash in oil prices – petrochemicals account for nearly all of the country’s exports – meant that the socialist government no longer had the funds to cover its high-spending programme. Rampant hyperinflation (believed to exceeded 2000 percent) has resulted in shop shelves sitting empty and many citizens going hungry. It is estimated that 75 percent of the population lost an average of 19 pounds in 2016 after lacking the required nutrition for a healthy lifestyle. In response to the crisis, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has become increasingly autocratic and has consolidated power in a country now considered a dictatorship.

4 – Libya (25.1% of GDP)
Optimism was high in Libya following the downfall of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, but post-dictatorship prosperity has failed to materialise, with successive leaders unable to impose control over a divided, warring nation. Instability has devastated the country’s oil production, Libya’s main source of revenue, and many other key sectors have been left largely unregulated. Without a fully functioning government, the likelihood of Libya reducing its fiscal deficit remains slim.

5 – Brunei (17.3% of GDP)
Not to be confused with the African country of Burundi, Brunei is a minuscule state split into two parts by Malaysia. A British colony until 1984, the country’s economy is supported almost exclusively by oil and gas exports. The government provides free medical care and education despite charging citizens no VAT or income tax. Though GDP per capita remains one of the world’s highest, GDP growth rates have only exceeded four percent once since 1995.

The problems are mounting for South Africa’s ailing economy

South Africa is a country of dualism. Within the second-largest economy in Africa, a plethora of opportunities may exist, but they are impaired by gruelling challenges: the legacy of a painful past hinders hopes for the present, while progressive regulations are impeded by inefficient implementation. The lives of the wealthy one percent could not be more different to those of around 50 percent of a 56.72 million-strong population living in poverty. The highly educated juxtapose with the illiterate (of which there are around three million), and mansions in heavily guarded areas are but a short drive away from rickety shanties in townships. Beneath all this, there is a current of deeply conflicting, racially aligned views on how to resolve the country’s biggest problems.

Within the second-largest economy in Africa, a plethora of opportunities are impaired by gruelling challenges

Though South Africa boasts good infrastructure, a well-developed financial system and sound innovation capability, extraordinarily high crime rates, poor security and a problematic labour market continue to stunt the country’s potential. This duality has long marred its economy. And then, in May 2009, came Jacob Zuma, a president who commanded the country with disgraceful illegality.

A long-awaited surge of optimism swept the nation when Cyril Ramaphosa was named the fifth president of South Africa in February 2018. The protégé of Nelson Mandela, he was the icon’s former aide turned self-made billionaire, and a hero of the anti-apartheid struggle. Ramaphosa’s shrewdness has been hailed worthy of the challenge laid down by Zuma – a leader accused of stifling the economy not only through his ineptitude, but by breeding a culture of corruption throughout.

Crime never pays
Zuma’s infamy has been amplified by a long string of scandals involving racketeering, fraud, money laundering and, of course, corruption – a word with which he has since become synonymous. In addition to allegedly taking bribes from arms dealers, Zuma and his associates have been found at the centre of a carefully calculated system of stealing taxpayer’s money through state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Zuma denies any wrongdoing, telling a crowd in April 2018 that he is “innocent until proven guilty”.

‘State capture’, once an academic term that is now frequently used by the South African populace, is defined by Transparency International as when “companies, institutions or powerful individuals use corruption, such as the buying of laws, amendments, decrees or sentences, as well as illegal contributions to political parties and candidates, to influence and shape a country’s policy, legal environment and economy to their own interests”.

The very nature of crime is a deterrent to doing business in both the formal and the informal sectors

“In the first instance, what [state capture] has done is undermine the performance of SOEs,” explained Professor Haroon Bhorat, Director of the Development Policy Research Unit at the University of Cape Town. “That has reduced the ability of SOEs to act as a lever for economic growth, to crowd in investment, [and do] all sorts of good things in the private sector.”

As well as starving companies generally, and much of the private sector of government business in particular, state capture has also reduced the South African economy’s international competitiveness. The implementation of regulations, the predictability of the policy environment and process efficiency have all been affected, as evidenced in October, when the World Economic Forum revealed that South Africa had slipped five places since 2017 in its annual Global Competitiveness Report.

56.72m

Population of South Africa in 2017

57

murders take place every day in South Africa

6.9%

Increase in murder rate between 2017 and 2018

Deeply intertwined in the scandal are the now-fallen business tycoons, the Guptas. The trio of brothers, who emigrated from India in the early 1990s, are accused of using their friendship with the former president to influence political appointments and win state contracts. Though the Guptas said in 2017 that there were no cases to answer, stories of diverting government funds intended for development projects to bolster their already bulging bank balances – and even, allegedly, to pay for an extravagant wedding in 2013 – will stain the social consciousness for years to come.

The outcome has been almost unfathomable. As Bhorat told World Finance: “It’s been close to a decade of lost years for the South African economy – they’ve been lost at the altar of corruption and state capture, and the cost to growth has been absolutely enormous.” Some economists believe it could be quantified to the tune of ZAR 100bn ($7bn) – others say it has been far more costly.

Many who supported Ramaphosa’s campaign are hopeful that the state capture commission of inquiry will expose the corruption that has permeated the state. Since starting in August, the commission has already implicated several high-ranking individuals, including the former ministers for communications and mineral resources.

Inherent vice
But the sense of wrongdoing has not just been circulating among the upper echelons: it goes deep throughout all segments of society. Living against a backdrop of crime is a reality that South Africans face every day. An unwavering feeling of angst comes from multiple sources – violent crime, property crime, gender-based crime and all the many variances in between. And things seem to be getting worse.

According to the latest statistics released by the South African Police Service together with Statistics South Africa, overall crime rates had slightly dipped from March 2017 to April 2018, but the murder rate had increased significantly. Up by 6.9 percent from the year before, 57 murders take place in South Africa every day, at an alarming rate of 35.7 out of every 100,000 people. Expressing his shock at the figures, which were released in September, Police Minister Bheki Cele said the country was becoming a “war zone”.

Cash-in-transit crimes, meanwhile, soared by 57 percent to 238 cases reported during the period, bank robbery was up by 333 percent, and increases were also reported for truck hijacking, stock theft and drug-related crimes.
This high rate of financial crimes acts as an unfortunate deterrent to investment. “Firms have to spend significantly larger amounts relative to competitive firms in other countries on crime prevention items, whether it’s burglary bars, alarms systems [or] armoured vehicles,” said Bhorat.

The very nature of crime is a deterrent to doing business in both the formal and the informal sectors, meaning that firms – domestic or foreign – are less inclined to start a business. Johan Fourie, an economics professor at Stellenbosch University, told World Finance: “If one looks at the amount of money spent on safety and security by businesses, it is likely to [be] a huge consideration when international firms decide where to [invest]. Higher costs make products and services more expensive, and there is no doubt that we all pay for the high level of crime in the country.”

There’s another harm, too, that inevitably transpires: South Africa’s notorious crime rates can be off-putting for an untold number of tourists. Tourism is a vital sector to the economy – according to the World Travel and Tourism Council, it accounts for 9.5 percent of total employment in South Africa. In a country with an unemployment rate of 27.3 percent – a figure that has been rising over the last decade (see Fig 1) – the industry becomes even more significant. It’s no wonder, then, that the government is making a big push into the sector, speeding up visa processes and upgrading event infrastructure in a bid to bolster numbers by 40 percent by 2021. But the perception of the country must alter if these ambitions are to be reached, and for that to happen, the root causes of crime in South Africa must be addressed.

The scourge of inequality
With concentrated poverty come high rates of alcoholism, drug addiction and joblessness – which, in turn, can contribute to climbing criminality. But these factors alone cannot explain the situation in South Africa. While neighbouring countries exhibit greater poverty, for instance, they do not suffer from the same problems with crime that are endemic within South Africa. As many experts believe, it is not poverty per se that causes high rates of crime, but evident inequality.

Economic growth can help to combat inequality in South Africa, but the country is somewhat trapped in this respect

Over the years, various studies have alluded to this link. Offering a starting point was the seminal work of Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker in 1974, Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach, which argued that crime rates are dependent upon perceived risks, as well as the difference between potential gains and opportunity costs. Others have then gone on to interpret income inequality as an indicator of the distance between this difference.

A study published in 2002 by the World Bank, meanwhile, stated: “Crime rates and inequality are positively correlated.” According to the paper, in accordance with the theory of relative deprivation, “the feeling of disadvantage and unfairness leads the poor to seek compensation and satisfaction by all means, including committing crimes against both poor and rich”.

50%

Approximate percentage of South Africans living in poverty

3m

Estimated number of illiterate South Africans

27.3%

Rate of unemployment in South Africa

Inequality is the unhappy cornerstone of the South African economy. In fact, according to a March 2018 paper by the World Bank, South Africa had a Gini coefficient (a statistical measure of the distribution of wealth) of 0.63 in 2015, making it the worst in the world. The report went on to suggest that education and the labour market are “primarily responsible” for overall inequality.

Further exacerbating the problem is the enduring legacy of apartheid. In addition to its contribution to the strong spatial element of poverty in South Africa, it plays a cultural role too. “Sociologists talk about a culture of violence, which comes from apartheid being quite a violent way of running society,” Bhorat explained. Distrust in the police force from that time has remained, and given the unreliability that the body is known for, it simply fails to deter criminals.

“We do have a fairly weak enforcement regime, so what you have is a police service that could be much, much stronger and much more efficient in clamping down on criminal activity,” said Bhorat.

And even then, it’s not quite so simple. Fourie believes that a lack of study prevents a greater understanding of the root causes behind South Africa’s abnormally high rate of crime. He told World Finance: “Crime is not only related to poverty or inequality. There are a multitude of factors at play, and there are simply too few researchers trying to understand the causes from an analytical perspective. Only once we understand the causes better will we be able to do something fundamental about it.”

The low-growth trap
With the right mechanisms in place, economic growth can help combat inequality in South Africa, but the country is somewhat trapped in this respect. “South Africa has only grown by around 2.5 percent per annum over the last 25 years [see Fig 2] – on a per capita basis it’s about one percent,” said Bhorat, comparing it with China’s 10 percent. “We are in this class of Brazil, South Africa, perhaps Turkey even, of middle-income countries in what is called a low-growth trap… They are just chronically unable to move beyond two, three percent growth rates.”

In addition to having a level of gross domestic fixed investment relative to GDP that is far too low (standing at around 17 percent, when, Bhorat advised, over 20 percent is needed), South Africa’s export profile is too reliant on natural resources. “That speaks to a lack of sophistication in our manufacturing,” said Bhorat. “So you’ve seen a decline in the manufacturing sector in the share of GDP.”

Many economies that manage to shift to a high-income status do so through export-based, low-wage manufacturing. But in South Africa, a deteriorating manufacturing sector has resulted in a decline in export revenue. “So we’re in this conundrum where we’re unable to kick-start manufacturing-based growth. The difficulty, then, is that our growth trajectory is based on hi-tech services, financial and business services and so on, outside of natural resources,” Bhorat told World Finance.

These sectors naturally require a highly skilled workforce, but herein lies another problem – South Africa’s schooling system is of extremely poor quality. To put it into perspective, in 2015, a league table put together by the OECD ranked South Africa’s education system 75th out of 76. The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study in November 2016, meanwhile, showed that a whopping 27 percent of students that had attended school for six years still couldn’t read. The rate in Tanzania, for comparison, is four percent.

Apartheid has a lot to answer for in terms of education in South Africa. With Mandela, racial segregation in schools came to an end, but in its place came economic segregation. But ironically, a lack of public funding isn’t actually the issue: in fact, South Africa spends around 6.4 percent of its GDP on education, a fair share more than the EU average of 4.8 percent. In terms of university, the level of enrolment is high too – but the standard of graduates, simply, is not.

Many pin this discrepancy down to the quality of teachers and a lack of accountability, both of which can be attributed to the South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU). “We have the problem of a very highly unionised teacher body that protects low-quality teachers, I think, at the cost of the schooling system,” Bhorat told World Finance. A damning report by Professor John Volmink published in May 2016 brought systemic and widespread corruption in the education system as a result of the SADTU to the surface. This included “the practice of selling posts whether through the exchange of money or other favours”. Further, too few students enter into technical and vocational education and training, meaning there is a considerable mismatch in the graduates produced in the country and the graduates needed by the economy.

The ugly legacy
Added into this already complex fold is a market that’s highly concentrated. “If you take manufacturing subsectors, on average a maximum of five firms control 70 percent of the market share – food and beverages, motor vehicles and so on,” Bhorat explained. “Effectively what you have is a highly concentrated product market that doesn’t generate the kind of domestic competitiveness you need.”

Apartheid has a lot to answer for in terms of education in South Africa

He continued: “I give a simple example to my students – if you were in the UK or the US and you’re a really good artisanal baker, you will be able to find a market, establish a business, you’ll get a decent revenue stream and you’ll do well. In South Africa it’s impossible, because the barriers to entry are really high. You try and do that and the large retailers lock you out very quickly. And that’s true across most areas.”

This is another remnant of apartheid rule that continues to reverberate throughout the economy. During that period, the South African economy was cut off from the rest of the world – a situation instigated by the ruling regime and cemented by economic sanctions. Shielded from international competition, with incentives given for the favoured few, certain companies were able to grow and expand, becoming giant conglomerates in an oligopolistic market structure.

This path sees business giants maintain first-mover advantage, thereby preventing SMEs from gaining a piece of the pie. Aside from the somewhat impossible competition, institutional inefficiencies that are exacerbated by labour regulations further dissuade foreign and domestic investors.

A new hope
South Africa has a long way to go, with numerous obstacles to overcome. But for the first time in a long time, there is hope – hope in a new president who has already begun dealing with the mess left behind by his predecessor.

“The president’s doing a good job,” Bhorat said. “He’s slowly changing the cabinet and he’s reorientating SOEs to get rid of corruption – I think in the short run, those are the challenges, but I think we’re on the right mark.”

Liberating SOEs from the clutches of corruption will see funds move back to the areas in which they were initially intended. Competitiveness in South Africa can be given the chance to improve once more. But within this space, it is vital to give enterprising individuals the chance of market entry – enabling them to compete freely will have untold consequences on the economy.

In parallel, issues within the labour market and the education system must be addressed, corruption must be squashed, and teaching standards must be improved. Given that these could well be the underlying reasons behind South Africa’s incredible levels of inequality – and, subsequently, crime – the ripple effects of doing so could positively spread to every corner of this diverse country. South Africa’s past has been brutal and its present remains difficult, but there is still a chance to see the fair and fruitful future promised to the rainbow nation when apartheid ended in 1994.