Anand Sinha: Changing contours of global crisis - impact on the Indian
economy
Address by Mr Anand Sinha, Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, at the Finance
Summit, organised by IIM Kashipur (Indian Institute of Management), Kashipur, 11 February
2012.
* * *
Inputs provided by Mr. Janak Raj, Mr.Sudarsana Sahoo, Ms. Pallavi Chavan and Mr. Jayakumar Yarasi are
gratefully acknowledged.
Dr. Devi Singh, Director, IIM Lucknow and Mentor Director, IIM Kashipur; Professor Manoj
Anand; other members of the faculty; my fellow bankers and the young and "raring to go"
students of Indian Institute of Management, Kashipur. A very good evening to you all. I deem
it a privilege to address young and bright students like this. I see in them the willingness to
listen, courage to question and the enthusiasm to take on challenges that the future holds for
them. In short, I see in them, the answers to the challenges we face today. It is always
energizing as well as educating to interact with students and that is the precise reason why I
had no second thoughts in accepting the invitation to interact with them even at a place far
off from my workplace, Mumbai.
IIM, Kashipur is the youngest IIM. There is a benefit in being young in the group. You have a
pool of experience to choose from and to learn. At the same time, the challenges of being
young in the group are also quite daunting. You are expected to reach and maintain the
heights reached by your seniors and even surpass them. Looking at the enthusiasm of the
students today, I am sure IIM, Kashipur will soon emerge as one of the premier institutions
among IIMs.
The topic chosen for today's address, on the face of it, looks quite jaded. So much has
already been said, discussed, analysed, dissected and written about the crisis. The crisis
which erupted in 2007 has, in no time, engulfed the consciousness of the public so much,
that no finance speech is complete without a reference to it nor is a finance book
consummate without a chapter devoted. Going by the number of books published on crisis,
one would not be greatly surprised if publishing industry was one of the few industries that
stayed afloat, or in fact, thrived during the crisis.
Then, why am I deliberating on a topic which has been discussed so much already? It is
because of two reasons. One, this crisis still continues to offer a wealth of information and
lessons, which will remain relevant in times to come. Second, the crisis does not remain what
it was, when it started. The crisis which started off as a localized sub-prime crisis has
morphed into a financial crisis leading to a full blown global economic crisis and has now
taken the shape of a sovereign debt crisis. While its current spread is localized in Eurozone,
its impact continues to be felt all across the globe. It is in this context that I would place my
talk today on the changing contours of crisis and its impact on the Indian economy.
I. Calm before the storm - a period of great moderation
Great Moderation
The period preceding the Global Crisis was a phase of representing the
decline in macroeconomic volatility (both output as well as inflation). The period was marked
by strong worldwide GDP growth coupled with low or stable inflation and very low interest
rates which lulled the policy makers and the economists into believing that their search for
"holy grail" was over and the magic formula of strong growth with low inflation had been
finally discovered. The great moderation was attributed1 to (i) structural changes that may
have increased macroeconomic flexibility and stability such as improved management of
business inventories made possible by advances in computation and communication,
increased depth and sophistication of financial markets, deregulation in many industries, the
shift away from manufacturing to services and increased openness to trade and international
good luck.
capital flows etc. (ii) improved performance of macroeconomic policies or (iii) The
role of good luck in maintaining great moderation was extensively discussed and debated
and, as anyone would expect, its role was discounted when things were going good.
The problem in attributing entire credit to good luck is that it leaves you unprepared and
vulnerable to shocks since, by relying solely on luck, you become effectively, a prisoner of
circumstances. On the other hand, not giving luck its rightful due encourages you to overrate
yourself and leaves you underprepared when a crisis hits.
Whatever was the reason, the good times did not last long and the period of great
moderation came to an end by 2007 when the crisis erupted. The impact of the crisis on
financial world was immense. The global growth slumped, unemployment burgeoned,
interbank markets froze on account of heightened counterparty concerns and risk aversion,
banking activity plummeted while the non-performing loans increased and many large and
famous institutions were obliterated from the face of financial world. The impact of the crisis
on the non-financial front was no less. In fact, the crisis caused deeper impact on the
intellectual world, by rubbishing concepts and theories that were held sacrosanct till then.
Analysts, researches and policymakers huddled to diagnose the reasons for the crisis and
came out with various theories and explanations. The more plausible explanation goes this
way. Differences in the consumption and investment patterns among countries (a saving glut
in Asia and oil exporting countries and a spending binge in the United States) have resulted
in emergence of global imbalances which led to large capital flows from surplus countries
into deficit countries which were mostly the advanced countries.
These capital flows have resulted in a surge of liquidity in advanced economies leading to
low interest rates. Both the short term as well as the long term real interest rates remained
too low for a too long period. Low interest rates forced the investors to hunt for yield which
sowed the seeds for asset inflation. Financial engineering assumed the centre stage in a bid
to design and offer high yielding products to investors.
In addition to the above factors, gaps in the regulatory framework also played their part in
accentuating crisis. The following reasons are widely attributed to the outbreak of crisis-
inadequate quantity and quality of capital, insufficient liquidity buffers, excessively leveraged
financial institutions, inadequate coverage of certain risks, absence of a regulatory
framework for addressing systemic risks, proliferation of opaque and poorly understood
financial products in search of yields in the backdrop of an era of "great moderation",
perverse incentive structure in securitisation process, lack of transparency in OTC markets
particularly the CDS, inadequate regulation and supervision, and a burgeoning
under/unregulated shadow banking system.
While all these factors were playing in the background creating a perfect recipe for the crisis,
the most proximate cause for the Crisis was the developments in the US subprime market.
As observed by Raghuram Rajan2, growing income inequality in the United States, stemming
from unequal access to quality education, led to political pressure for more housing credit
which led to distorted lending in the financial sector. In a classic case of best intentions
leading to worst outcomes due to bad implementation, the envisaged policy of financial
inclusion by enabling homeless to own homes, led to reckless lending in sub-prime market
and, eventually, resulted in a meltdown.
The crisis, when erupted in 2007, started off as a mere sub-prime crisis localized in the US.
But soon the crisis spread to other markets cutting across geographical boundaries signifying
the extent of the global integration. The subprime crisis became a banking crisis due to the
exposures banks had to the subprime assets which were fast turning bad. Counterparty
concerns exacerbated, leading to freezing of global interbank markets. The crisis had spread
to other jurisdictions through various channels of contagion - trade, finance and most
importantly, confidence. Foreign investors started withdrawing investments from emerging
markets pushing them also into liquidity crisis. By Oct 2008, when Lehman Brothers had
collapsed under the weight of sub-prime exposures, the crisis had become truly global, both
in spread and impact.
The crisis had a devastating impact on the world economy in terms of output losses and rise
in unemployment. It had impacted all the segments of the global financial markets in terms of
heightened volatility, tighter credit conditions, low asset prices and increased write downs.
The policy makers, regulators and the sovereigns had to immediately step in and initiate
measures to mitigate the impact of crisis. There have been many measures, both
conventional and unconventional, that were taken which provided relief to the badly battered
global economy.
Just when we thought the crisis was behind us, with economies slowly limping back to
normalcy, another crisis hit the World. In a classic case of cure being more painful than
the disease, various fiscal measures taken to mitigate the impact of 2007 crisis have, along
with other factors, led to huge and unsustainable sovereign debts resulting in a sovereign
debt crisis in Eurozone. Countries that have run up huge fiscal deficits, either to maintain
populist policies or to bail out institutions during the global crisis by guaranteeing failing
banks etc., have suddenly found themselves on the verge of bankruptcy unable to honour
their obligations and the word "sovereign debt" suddenly ceased to evoke images of a
riskless (less risky, at least) asset.
With this background in place, I would now move on to the central theme of the talk today
"Changing Contours of global Crisis - Impact on Indian Economy". I intend to cover the
impact of both the crises i.e. Global Crisis 2007 and the current sovereign debt crisis, on
Global and Indian economies with specific focus on real sector, financial markets and the
banking system.
II. Global crisis
a. Impact on global economy
Following the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, the global inter-bank financial
markets froze in view of large losses suffered by the major financial institutions and the
extreme uncertainty over the health of the counterparty balance sheets. This had a knock on
effect on various segments of financial markets, including inter-bank markets. Fire sales by
investors contributed to further downward pressures on asset prices, leading to a vicious
cycle of distress sales and declining asset prices. Heightened risk aversion and search for
safe havens led to deleveraging by investors and consequent sharp and substantial
retrenchment in capital flows to emerging and developing economies. All this turmoil in
various segments of the financial markets led to a sharp decline in economic activity in the
major advanced economies. Unemployment rates soared and labour markets became weak.
Given the high and growing degree of trade and financial integration between the advanced
economies and the Emerging and Developing Economies (EDEs), activity in the EDEs also
decelerated sharply.
Real GDP growth in advanced economies turned negative in 2009 (-3.7 per cent) from the
strong pace of 2.9 per cent during 2004-07. Growth recovered modestly in 2010, but again
turned anaemic in 2011 (1.6 per cent). Growth in advanced economies averaged a mere
0.3 per cent during 2008-11 and output still remains well below potential. The IMF expects
growth in advanced economies to decelerate further to 1.2 per cent in 2012. Unemployment
rate in the US more than doubled from 4.4 per cent in December 2006 to a peak of 10.0 per
cent in October 2009; it has since then eased, at a very gradual pace, to 8.5 per cent.
Capital flows (net) to EDEs more than halved from US $ 715 billion in 2007 to
US $ 246 billion in 2008 as portfolio and banking flows turned negative. Reflecting the growth
shock in the advanced economies as well as the retrenchment in capital flows, real GDP
growth in the EDEs decelerated from 8.0 per cent during 2004-7 to 2.8 per cent in 2009. It
recovered quickly to 7.3 per cent in 2010. Overall, global GDP growth contracted to 0.6 per
cent in 2009 from the robust growth of 5.0 per cent during 2004-07.
In the global credit and money markets, the risk spreads had ballooned during the crisis
period. The TED spread3 exceeded 300bps on September 17, 2008 breaking the previous
record set after the Black Monday crash of 1987 and, thereafter, reached an all time high of
464 bps on Oct 10, 2008. The 3M LIBOR-3M OIS spread4 touched the high of 364 bps on
October 10, 2008 as against the normal level of around 10 bps. The huge risk aversion was
reflected in sharp decline in the stock indices across the globe and heightened volatility.
Global equity markets witnessed major sell-offs in March 2009. The Dow Jones Industrial
Average (DJIA) registered the new twelve-year low of 6,547.05 (on closing basis) on
March 9, 2009 and had lost 20% of its value in only six weeks. The VIX index -a widely used
measure of market risk and often referred to as the "investor fear gauge" - rose to a record
high of 80.86 on November 20, 2008. The yields of the treasury securities plummeted on the
back of safe haven demands, with the 10 year US Treasury yield touching a low of 2.05% on
Dec 30, 2008. The three month T-Bill yield fell to (-) 4 basis points, the lowest it has been
since 1954 reflecting unprecedented flight-to-safety. The CDS spreads widened markedly.
The major CDS indices5, i.e. CDX Cross Over, CDX Investment Grade, iTraxx Europe
crossover and iTraxx Europe, touched the highs of 699 bps, 242 bps, 1150 bps and 206 bps
respectively during March 2009. In a parallel development, while other asset classes have
fallen in value, commodity prices surged during this period. Financialisation of commodities is
believed to have added to the inflationary pressure. Both Gold and Crude oil prices had
spiralled during the period.
Global crisis has also severely affected the growth and health of global banking sector. Bank
credit growth in major economies such as US, UK, and the Eurozone secularly declined
throughout 2009. The asset quality has also been adversely impacted with NPA (as % of
total loans) rising to higher levels. The NPAs in the UK and US have risen from 0.9 per cent
and 1.4 per cent in 2007 to 4.0 per cent and 4.9 per cent in 2009 respectively. The capital
position of the banks, however, remained comfortable with most global banks continuing to
step up their capital positions notwithstanding the crisis. By 2010, the Capital to Risk
Weighted Assets Ratio (CRAR) was placed above 15 per cent for banks in UK, US, Japan
and Germany.
b. Policy responses: global
In response to the collapse in economic activity, large losses suffered by major banks and
financial institutions and severe disruption in financial markets, there was an unprecedented
policy response by both monetary and fiscal authorities. Given the severe impact on
economic activity and the vicious circle of expectations, the policy response was globally
coordinated. As economic activity slowed down sharply, monetary policy was eased
aggressively in both advanced economies and EDEs. In major advanced economies, policy
interest rates were cut to almost zero levels by early 2009 which stayed around those levels
even three years later (as of early 2012). Given the large unemployment rates and negative
output gaps, the US Federal Reserve has indicated that the policy rate - the federal funds
rate - will remain near zero till late 2014. The policy rate would thus remain near zero for
almost six years, going by the Fed's current assessment. In view of near zero policy interest
rates and limitations imposed by the zero bound on the interest rates, the US Federal
Reserve and other major central banks in advanced economies have also resorted to
unprecedented quantitative easing - substantial infusion of liquidity - in an attempt to ease
credit and financing conditions and drive long-term yields lower.
Turning to fiscal measures, to begin with, governments in major advanced economies
provided direct support to the failing financial institutions. Subsequently, in view of the
collapse of growth and the constraints posed by the lower zero bound on the interest rates,
governments in almost all jurisdictions resorted to stimulus packages to boost activity.
Despite the large fiscal and monetary stimuli, economic activity remained sluggish.
C. Impact of crisis on India
The global financial crisis impacted India significantly, notwithstanding the sound banking
system, negligible exposure of Indian banks to sub-prime assets and relatively
wellfunctioning financial markets. The impact was mainly on account of India's growing trade and
financial integration with the global economy. India's two way trade (merchandize exports
plus imports), as a proportion of GDP, was 40.7 per cent in 2008-09, the crisis year, up from
19.6 per cent in 1998-99. The ratio of total external transactions (gross current account flows
plus gross capital account flows) to GDP - an indicator of both trade and financial
integration - was 112 per cent in 2008-09 up from 44 per cent in 1998-99.
The immediate impact of the crisis was felt through large capital outflows and consequent fall
in the domestic stock markets on account of sell-off by Foreign Institutional Investors and
steep depreciation of the Rupee against US Dollar. The BSE Sensex (on closing basis),
which had touched a peak of 20873 on January 8, 2008, declined to a low of 8160 on
March 9, 2009. While the capital outflows led to decline in the domestic forex liquidity, RBI's
intervention in the forex market resulted in tightening of Rupee liquidity. The inter-bank call
money (overnight) rates firmed up during the period from second half of September '08 to
end October '08 (high of 19.70 per cent on October 10). However, the series of liquidity
augmenting measures undertaken by RBI resulted in call rates coming back to the normal
levels from first week of November '08.
Global recession had adversely affected the Indian exports resulting in widening of current
account deficit (CAD). Exports which grew at 25 per cent during 2005/08 decelerated to
13.6 per cent in the crisis year (2008-09) and registered a negative growth of 3.5 per cent in
2009-10. Output growth, which averaged little less than 9 per cent in the previous five years
and 9.5 per cent during the three year period 2005-08, dropped to 6.8 per cent in the crisis
year (2008-09).
In the pre-crisis years, capital inflows were far in excess of the current account deficit (CAD)
and the Reserve Bank had to absorb these flows in its balance sheet. As global investors
tried to rebalance their portfolios during the crisis period, the country witnessed large capital
outflows immediately after the collapse of Lehman Brothers leading to a downward pressure
on the rupee. The exchange rate depreciated from Rs. 39.37 per dollar in January 2008 to
Rs. 51.23 per dollar in March 2009.
The credit markets also came under pressure as corporates, finding it difficult to raise
resources through external sources of funding, turned to domestic bank and non-bank
institutions for funding and also withdrew their investments from the liquid schemes of mutual
funds. This, in turn, put redemption pressure on mutual funds (MFs) and, further along the
chain, on non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) for whom MFs were a significant source
of funding.
The Indian banking sector has, however, withstood the spillover effects of the global financial
crisis as was evident in the robust CRAR and Tier 1 CRAR which remained far above the
stipulated regulatory minimum of 9 per cent. The asset quality was also comfortable despite
some slippages. By end March 2010, the Gross NPA ratio stood at 2.50 per cent (net NPA
1.13%) while the CRAR was 13.58 per cent. The spillover effects of the crisis were, however,
most visible in the credit growth of banking sector. Since September 2008, the growth rate of
advances, as also of assets, started witnessing a declining trend which continued for almost
one year up to September 2009. The Y-o-Y growth in advances fell from 28.5 per cent at the
end March 2007 to 12.3 per cent by end Sept 2009 while the Y-o-Y growth in assets fell from
22.9 per cent to 15.1 per cent during the same period.
d. Policy response - India
Given the deceleration in growth and drying up of capital flows, both the Reserve Bank and
the Government undertook a number of measures to minimise the impact of the crisis on
India. There was, however, a notable difference between Indian response and those of many
EMEs, on the one hand, and the advanced economies, on the other hand. While policy
responses in advanced economies had to contend with both the unfolding financial crisis and
deepening recession, the Indian response was predominantly driven by the need to arrest
moderation in economic growth. The main plank of the government response was fiscal
stimulus while the Reserve Bank's action comprised counter-cyclical regulatory measures
and also measures to ensure easy liquidity and monetary conditions.
The Reserve Bank's policy measures were aimed at containing the contagion from the
outside - to keep the domestic money and credit markets functioning normally and ensure
that the liquidity stress did not trigger solvency cascades. As in the case of other central
banks, both conventional and unconventional measures were undertaken. The conventional
measures included, first, a sharp reduction in the policy interest rates - the effective policy
rate was cut from 9 per cent (repo rate) in September 2008 to 3.25 per cent (reverse repo
rate) in April 2009. Second, the cash reserve ratio was reduced from 9.0 per cent in
September 2008 to 5 per cent in January 2009 with a view to injecting liquidity into the
banking system. Third, liquidity injection in bulk was made through purchase of government
securities under open market operation (OMO) and unwinding of the balances under Market
Stabilization Scheme (MSS) through buy-back, redemptions and de-sequestering. Fourth,
refinance facilities for export credit were enhanced. Measures were also taken for enhancing
forex liquidity which included an upward adjustment of the interest rate ceiling on the
deposits by non-resident Indians under FCNR (B) and NRE deposit accounts and relaxation
in norms for external commercial borrowings (ECB). In view of the slowing economy and
decelerating credit flow, the counter-cyclical regulatory measures introduced in 2006 were
also reversed.
The unconventional measures taken by the Reserve Bank of India included; institution of a
rupee-dollar swap facility for Indian banks to give them comfort in managing short-term
foreign funding requirements of their overseas branches; special liquidity support to banks for
on-lending to mutual funds and non-banking financial companies; liquidity support to
nonbanking financial companies through a special purpose vehicle created for the purpose and
expansion of the lendable resources available to apex finance institutions for refinancing
credit extended to small industries, housing and exports. The measures undertaken by the
Reserve Bank during September 2008 - July 2009 have resulted in augmentation of
actual/potential liquidity of Rs. 5, 61,700 cr.
The fiscal stimulus measures, undertaken in December 2008 and January 2009, included
additional public spending as well as cuts in taxes. These stimulus packages came on top of
an already announced expanded safety-net for rural poor, a farm loan waiver package and
salary increases for government staff, all of which too stimulated demand.
Taken together, the fiscal and monetary measures were successful in achieving their
objectives. Financial markets and the banking sector began to function normally. Real GDP
growth which took a hit in 2008-09 as it reached 6.8 per cent recovered quickly to reach
8.0 per cent in 2009-10 and 8.5 per cent in 2010-11 under the impact of stimulus measures
as also the inherent strength of domestic demand. Strong recovery in demand, along with
persistent supply pressures, however, led to inflationary pressures during 2010-2011.
e. Why was the impact on India muted?
Despite its immediate impact on the financial markets and the trade flows, the crisis did not
have very significant impact on the Indian financial system. The reasons for the muted
impact is attributable primarily to (i) the macroprudential approach to regulation (ii) multiple
indicator based monetary policy, (iii) calibrated capital account management,
(iv) management of systemic interconnectedness, (v) robust market infrastructure for OTC
transactions and (vi) a conservative approach towards financial innovation.
The monetary policy formulation by the Reserve Bank of India has been guided by multiple
objectives and multiple instruments contrary to the approach followed by some countries of
single objective and single instruments. Monitoring of multiple macroeconomic indicators has
helped the Reserve Bank in interpreting developments in financial system and taking prompt
corrective action. Similarly, measures such as putting in place robust systems for reducing
counterparty risk in OTC transactions through CCP arrangements and regulation of shadow
banking institutions to address the interconnectedness issues have helped in containing the
impact of the crisis and helping the economy keep afloat despite the huge global
turbulences.
III. Metamorphosis of the crisis into sovereign debt crisis:
Just when the global economy was reverting to the normalcy, another crisis in the nature of
sovereign debt crisis surfaced. The growing debts of many European sovereigns caused
sustainability concerns forcing investors to withdraw from these markets which led to
significant escalation of their CDS spreads. The crisis which emerged in late 2009 has
engulfed the entire Eurozone by end 2011. While only Greek bonds had CDS spreads higher
than 200 bps in April 2010, by Jan 2012, bonds of all countries except Germany, Finland and
the Netherlands had CDS spreads higher than 200 bps. In fact, bonds of PIIGS countries
(Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain) had CDS spreads even higher than 400 bps.
The combination of sluggish activity, bailouts and fiscal stimulus measures have led to
ballooning of fiscal deficits and public debt/GDP ratios in major advanced economies and
have raised concerns over fiscal sustainability. These concerns are most visible in euro area
countries, which were plagued by various combinations of problems such as over-large
banking sector that had become exposed to a housing boom and bust, an uncompetitive
economy signaled by repeated current account deficits, and a bloated state sector with high
private-sector unemployment6. For example, fiscal deficit/GDP ratios of advanced economies
jumped from a near balance position (deficit of 0.6 per cent) in 2007 to 9.0 per cent in 2009,
with that of the US jumping from 2.7 per cent to 13.0 per cent over the same period. Fiscal
deficits of emerging economies also rose, albeit relatively modestly, from a surplus of 0.1 per
cent in 2007 to a deficit 4.8 per cent in 2009. The public debt/GDP ratio for advanced
economies increased from 73.4 per cent in 2007 to 93.7 per cent in 2009 and further to
103.5 per cent in 2011. The ratios for Emerging Market Economies (EMEs) over the same
years were almost unchanged at 35.9 per cent, 36.7 per cent and 37.8 per cent.
The sovereign debt crisis, in a way has completed the circle - during the Global crisis 2007
the impact spread from banking system to sovereigns while in the current crisis, the impact is
in the reverse direction, from sovereigns to banks. What makes the present crisis more
disturbing is, in the Global crisis, when banks were under stress there was a backstop in the
nature of sovereigns, but now sovereigns themselves are on the verge of default leaving
everyone wonder as to what could be a backstop for a sovereign default.
Impact of sovereign debt crisis on global economy:
The current crisis has jeopardized the recovery plans put in place by regulators, policy
makers and the sovereigns post global crisis. Despite the source and the immediate impact
being localized in Eurozone, the knock on effects of the crisis are felt all across the globe.
Financial conditions have deteriorated, growth prospects dimmed and downside risks have
escalated. IMF's World Economic Outlook has revised the Global output growth downwards
to 3.25 per cent with the Euro area economy expected to go into a mild recession in 2012 as
result of rise in sovereign yields, the effects of bank leveraging and the impact of additional
fiscal consolidation. The EDEs are also expected to post lower growth on account of
worsening external environment and a weakening internal demand.
Heightened risk aversion and deleveraging induced by the euro area crisis impacted financial
markets across the globe. Despite European Union's announcement of significant policy
actions during December 2011, the financial markets continued to reel under stress in the
backdrop of rating downgrade of European Financial Stability Fund (EFSF) and nine euro
area countries by S&P, of which four were downgraded by two notches. The CDS spreads
and yields of sovereign debts in the euro area have increased substantially during the recent
period. The inter-bank LIBOR market has been witnessing growing stress in terms of
declining volume, rising rates and shortening of tenor of lending. The USD LIBOR-OIS
spread and EURIBOR-OIS spread have widened significantly implying increased
counterparty credit risk premium. The equity markets across the globe have witnessed sharp
fall with increased volatility.
As regards the banking system, in countries directly impacted by the sovereign debt crisis
such as Spain, Portugal and Italy, there was a persistent slowdown in bank credit through
2011. In countries peripherally affected by the crisis such as France and Germany, the credit
growth which was showing signs of revival in 2010, has dipped again reflecting the impact of
the deepening of the sovereign debt crisis. The asset quality, as reflected in NPL ratios,
continued to deteriorate in Eurozone countries.
Apart from raising credit risks, the sovereign crisis has also increased funding risks for Euro
zone banks. As per an analysis by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), banks in
Greece, Ireland and Portugal have increasingly found it difficult to raise wholesale debt and
deposits, and have become reliant on central bank liquidity.7 The increase in the cost of
wholesale funding has also partially affected banks in other European countries.
According to the BIS, there are, broadly, four channels through which sovereign risk affect
banks' funding costs, given the pervasive role of government debt in the financial system.
i. First, losses associated with government debt weaken balance sheets of banks
making funding more costly and difficult to obtain.
ii. Second, higher sovereign risks reduce the value of the collateral that banks can use
to raise wholesale funding and central bank liquidity.
iii. Third, sovereign rating downgrades generally flow through to lower ratings for
domestic banks as banks are more likely than other sectors to be affected by
sovereign distress. As the banks' credit ratings decline, their wholesale funding
costs rise.
iv. Fourth, a weakening of the sovereign reduces the funding benefits that banks could
derive from implicit and explicit government guarantees.
Impact of sovereign debt crisis on India:
With the euro area appearing to head for a recession and the global growth slowing again
after a short recovery, growth in India too has moderated more than was expected earlier.
Increase in global uncertainty, weak industrial growth, slow down in investment activity and
deceleration in the resource flow to commercial sector led to dip in output growth. Inflation
risks emanating from suppressed domestic energy prices, incomplete pass-through of rupee
depreciation and slippage in fiscal deficit, further fuelled by food and commodity inflation
have led to policy tightening. All these factors have resulted in the growth projection for India
for 2011-12 being revised downwards from 7.6 per cent to 6.9 per cent.
Indian banking system has, however, not been impacted by current crisis as it does not have
any significant presence in countries impacted by the current crisis nor Indian banks have
any significant exposures to bonds issued by them. While the