Salvatore Rossi: Finance for growth
Speech by Mr Salvatore Rossi, Senior Deputy Governor of the Bank of Italy, at Banca
Popolare di Sondrio, Sondrio, 12 September 2014.
* * *
Growth
Italy has long strayed from the path of economic growth. Common sense tells us this is so
and the data confirm it.
In the last six years the recession has doubled the rate of unemployment and eroded
11 percentage points from per capita GDP. But our problems go back much further than that:
in 2008, on the eve of the financial crisis, the average amount of goods and services
produced by Italian workers was basically unchanged from 1995. In the same period other
countries, spurred by the technological paradigm shift of ICT, had seen their productivity
rates soar.
The strong growth in employment that was nevertheless recorded in Italy in the pre-crisis
years, favoured by the introduction of more flexible work contracts, proved insufficient to
offset the effect of the stagnation of productivity on households' disposable income. At the
outbreak of the crisis, for the average household this was at the same level as in the
mid1990s and only the progressive reduction of the saving rate had enabled modest growth in
consumption.
The diminishing ability to generate income heralds a decline in living standards, both with
respect to this country's past and to the world's main players. This is all the more worrying
when one considers that in forty years' time the ratio of people of working age (20-69) to
elderly retirees will have halved, from 4 to 2. Even just to maintain per capita living standards
at their current levels would require an increase in labour productivity of 25 per cent.
More jobs, more output: but how to achieve both together? Certainly, the recession has been
keeping Italian consumers and investors in a state of suspension for too long now, more
because of uncertainty and poor confidence than a lack of income. Stimulus must therefore
come from macroeconomic policy. At European level, monetary policy is already acting as a
spur and is stepping up its action.1 At national level, fiscal policy can only change the mix:
fewer taxes, less unproductive expenditure. Most of the government's efforts should go to
tackling the long-standing failings of our society, those that condition Italy's entrepreneurial
spirit.
Jobs and productivity are only formed within businesses. The State cannot create them
directly and would not know how to. The rules of good business have been neglected in Italy
for almost half a century: by many entrepreneurs reluctant to expand their firms, and by
public and political opinion prone to defending small and large rents.
A good business is one that researches and develops new products and new methods, and
pursues new markets. In the globalized economy, dominated by technologies that convey
information and alter consumer tastes at the speed of light, the small, mature firm that is
typically Italian does not have a very bright future; sometimes it does not even have a
present. Of the main European countries, Italy is the one with the widest productivity gap
between small and medium- large businesses.2 Businesses start out small everywhere, but
then they either die or grow rapidly. In Italy, if they do not die, they remain in the small-size
limbo for a long time: the proportion of small, mature firms (those in operation for at least ten
years) is over 50 per cent here, compared with 45 per cent in Spain and 40 per cent in the
United States and France.3
Encouraging new start-ups, convincing existing entrepreneurs to expand their firms by
separating them from the founding family's fortunes, rewarding courage and inventiveness,
and discouraging rents: these are the priorities of economic policy in Italy today. Reforming
the bloated fiscal and legislative systems and unravelling the tangle of red tape that litters the
path of entrepreneurs would enable Italy to move up several places in the global Doing
Business rankings and spark a virtuous circle between favourable expectations that then
become self-fulfilling; it would free the energies that this country still has in abundance.
Finance4
In the meantime, however, the recession is burning up resources and hopes. In the political
debate reported in Italy's daily press, the hunt is on for the culprits of the failed economic
recovery of these months. Banks are a recurring target, accused by some of denying credit
to firms and households, thereby impeding the country's exit from the crisis. But for such an
accusation to make sense, first the fact has to be established and then, to use the legal
terms, it must be proved that there was negligence or malice aforethought, in other words
that banks - currently lumped together in a general category - are refusing to lend to the
economy either because they would rather use the money available for unspecified financial
adventures (malice) or out of incompetence or laziness (negligence).
Let's look at the facts by taking two snapshots of the situation of bank lending, one at the end
of June 2008, immediately before the financial crisis erupted fully, and the other at the end of
June 2014. In this period total outstanding bank loans to Italian firms declined from
€860 billion to €830 billion, a lower level certainly, but not by much. In the initial phase of the
crisis, however, credit had risen to over €910 billion in December 2011, so the reduction with
respect to the peak was €80 billion. As a share of GDP (53 per cent), though, bank lending
today is still higher than, say, in Germany and France. Lending to households, instead,
expanded in the six years, from €520 to €600 billion. In the meantime, wholesale funding,
primarily by foreign banks and large international investors, fell dramatically, from almost
€800 to €550 billion, mainly owing in the last three years to the loss of confidence in Italy
following the global markets' reassessment of our sovereign debt. Banks have managed to
combat the drying up of foreign funding by increasing domestic retail funding and above all
by participating in the long-term refinancing operations of the European Central Bank.
Without these, the credit squeeze would have been much more severe.
This was not the main cause of the deterioration, however. Due to the persistence of the
recession between 2008 and 2013 the total stock of non-performing loans to firms and
households increased by just over €100 billion to €320 billion or by 16 per cent of total
outstanding loans. As far as it is possible to understand from a comparison of data that
reflect very different national definitions, this is higher than the average level in Europe. The
outcome, partly owing to increased reserve requirements, has been a dramatic fall in bank
profits, while the riskiness of firms' new credit demand has increased sharply.
Furthermore, in recent years the banks have had to strengthen their capital bases. They
were prompted to do so even more than by regulations and supervisors5 by the recession
itself (in that capital must be proportional to the riskiness of assets) and by the markets,
where confidence in the banks most exposed to more risky sovereigns was faltering. Over
the six years Italian banks expanded their core tier one capital by €50 billion, from
€134 billion to €184 billion. This capitalization drive was sustained by raising equity on the
market while at the same time retaining earnings - an arduous combination, as potential
subscribers of the capital increases had to be offered the prospect of good future returns.
The banks' shareholders were called on to bear the brunt of the problems of debtor firms,
with loan write-downs totalling nearly €140 billion.
From the banks' standpoint, the situation can be summarized as follows: before the crisis
bank credit was abundant because funding on the wholesale markets (mostly abroad) was
easy and because given low borrower risk no massive loan loss provisions were required.
With crisis and recession, both of these conditions vanished, so the rational course for a
bank, in the interest first and foremost of the savers who entrust their resources for prudent
investment, is to slow or reduce lending to the firms perceived as riskier and step up
investment in other, less risky and more profitable assets, such as government securities.
Banks' deleveraging was intensified by the sharp decline in credit demand from the less risky
firms, many of which cut back or suspended planned investments.
This straightforward analysis excludes the highly imaginative theory of "malice aforethought".
Let us now consider a second hypothesis, namely "negligence", i.e. the banks' culpable
incapacity for sagacious, farsighted assessment of individual borrowers' creditworthiness.
Here, judgment must be more nuanced. The heterogeneity of behaviour among banks
makes generic, summary judgment inadvisable. If we nevertheless intend to consider the
system as a whole, it would seem to me that Italy is in the grip of a perverse interaction
between the structural characteristics of the corporate system and those of the financial
system.
In too many cases Italian firms are not only small but financially fragile and bank- dependent.
Their financial leverage rose prior to the crisis and is now high by international standards
(44 per cent). Two thirds of their debt is bank debt. These features are more pronounced
among the smaller firms, precisely those most severely affected by the tightening credit
supply. For that matter, the typical features of Italian small businesses - diminutive size, little
commitment of shareholder capital, lack of transparency - make it nearly impracticable for
them to access the bond and equity markets directly, even if they wanted to (which they
rarely do).
For its part, the Italian financial system is notoriously bank-centred. At the end of last year
bank loans accounted for 40 per cent of the total financial liabilities of households and firms
(financial debt plus corporate equity), compared with 15 per cent in the United States, 23 per
cent in France, and 30 per cent in the United Kingdom. Only Germany, another
"bankcentred" economy, had a share comparable to Italy's. Equity investment by venture capital
and private equity funds, which specialize in start-ups and stimulating the growth of small
businesses, amounts to 0.2 per cent of GDP in Italy, as in Germany, or half as much as in
France and a fifth as much as in Britain.
For many years the Italian banking system favoured the family-based, fragmented structure
of its business customers because this gave them positional rents, sheltering them from
competition from other sources of funds, namely the financial and equity markets. Now the
banking system has become polarized: on the one hand, major players that tend to
concentrate on the largest customers, using quantitative risk measurement methods; and on
the other, a vast array of smaller banks, serving mainly small customers whose accounts are
often inadequate and opaque, and accordingly require direct knowledge of the business.
Such knowledge can be gained in two ways - by personal relationships or by analytical tools
for assessing the firm's technology and market characteristics. Both are useful, but each has
a specific drawback. Personal relationships are more approximate and riskier, analytical tools
costlier; in particular, as the latter have variable as well as overhead costs, they may be
prohibitive where the business and the loan are very small. Add the consideration that in the
event of default the inefficiency of Italian civil justice sometimes makes it uneconomic even to
initiate a credit recovery action, so that banks will write off virtually the entire amount of a
small non-performing loan, even if the expected loss, measured objectively, is limited. This
practice impacts on banks' lending decisions and the interest rates they charge.
This situation would appear to constitute a "market failure". The private sector parties,
borrowers and lenders, are incapable of making the credit mechanism work efficiently
because each responds to incentives and disincentives that clash with the general interest.
Small businesses want to stay as "opaque" as possible; indeed, they are accustomed to
understating their actual earnings for tax reasons. And in some instances banks do not
procure adequate facilities or methods for evaluating firms, it being more convenient, and in
the short run less costly, to rely on personal relationships. The outcome is adverse selection
and credit rationing.6 In some of the most pathological cases there have been outright bank
failures. In short, if the hypothesis of "negligence" is well founded, it applies to both sides of
the credit market.
This vicious circle, in which ultimately everyone loses and nobody gains, must be broken. It
is a life-or-death question for the many Italian SMEs that, while severely strained by
recession, still retain their markets, innovative capacity and technological assets, and have
the potential to recover. Half of our GDP is produced by small to medium-sized firms with
fewer than 250 employees. These SMEs must be helped to grow, not left to die when they
are not in fact terminally ill.
First of all, they should be enabled to get off the IV support of bank credit alone and learn to
raise funds in the market as well. This will take time. In the short term no more than a fraction
of bank credit can be readily replaced. So this market failure must be remedied, to the benefit
of all, by public intervention. But what form should that intervention take? In any case, public
intervention must be respectful of the market and compatible with the budget constraints.
The main tools available are government guarantees7 and securitization. A very substantial
contribution could also come from legislative and regulatory intervention to shorten credit
recovery time by making bankruptcy procedures simpler and more efficient, and the
securities collateral system more flexible.8
Public guarantees offset the information shortfall between lenders and SMEs without taking
the former's place in assessing creditworthiness and without being a burden on the budget in
the immediate, but only after bankruptcy is announced and within the limit of the ratio of
insolvencies to the total guarantees granted. A good example is already provided by the
Central Guarantee Fund operating under the aegis of the Ministry for Economic
Development, which partially guarantees banks that grant loans to small firms and
participates in the latter's screening. Since 2009 the Fund has granted guarantees on loans
amounting to more than €40 billion. The scale of the Fund's operations could be further
increased.
Securitizations serve essentially to distribute the risk inherent in bank loans to SMEs among
a large number of bank and non-bank institutional investors. In view of the small size of the
loans, it is necessary to create asset-backed securities, i.e. packages of loans in the form of
bonds, of which it is not too difficult to assess the quality, and place the various tranches with
different investors according to their risk appetite. Operations can be carried out by the
originator banks themselves or by other financial entities. These instruments could also be
backed in part by public guarantees. Notable among the possible investors are insurance
companies, which are often hard put in the present phase of the cycle to find desirable
investments for their technical provisions in terms of risk/return and maturity.
To develop such a market some regulatory problems must be overcome, firstly at
international level. The global financial crisis has discredited instruments such as ABS, which
were abused by pushing their complexity and opacity to the limit. But the abuses can be
forbidden without eliminating the instrument itself, which retains its rational basis. The ECB
has launched a very large programme for the purchase of simple and transparent ABS in
order among other objectives to facilitate the financing of SMEs. The Bank of Italy and Ivass
are following the matter closely. With great rapidity this summer Ivass drafted amendments
to the regulations on insurance companies' investments consistent with the new legislative
provisions introduced recently to increase the competitiveness of the Italian economy. The
new prudential regulations, aimed at achieving greater diversification of risk, will also allow
insurance companies to grant credit directly subject to well-defined limits and conditions. The
second public consultation, made necessary by the innovations introduced during the
conversion of the competitiveness decree law, is drawing to a close; Ivass will shortly issue
the new regulations.
However, markets able to channel large volumes of financial resources from non-bank
investors to SMEs cannot easily be created from one day to the next. Even when the
regulatory questions have been settled, there will still be the problem of the information
asymmetry between borrower firms and investors. Those who, better than others, know or
understand the present and prospective conditions of firms, first and foremost the banks that
originated the loans, therefore have an essential role to play.
It must not be forgotten, however, that in Italy, as I mentioned earlier, the main problem
regarding the functionality of the system lies in firms' financial fragility. The most important
task of public action is therefore to push firms towards equity financing rather than additional
borrowing, using every possible means, regulatory and fiscal. But bank borrowing too can be
made more rational by examining its technical forms. For example, traditional overdrafts are
so widespread in Italy that they stand out by international standards. The fact that they do not
establish a time limit for the credit actually granted creates problems for the calculation of
interest and lessens their eligibility as collateral; in order to accept such loans as collateral,
the Bank of Italy has recently asked for the inclusion of specific contractual clauses.
Using finance to the advantage of growth
The question of what are the determinants of economic growth in the long term has been at
the centre of economic analysis since this came into being as a separate science. More than
half a century ago attention was focused on productivity and technical progress as the
decisive factors for growth, demoting the accumulation of physical capital, which had
previously been considered the motor of capitalist growth.9 Today a new conceptual leap is
being attempted, moving up the scale of causes and effects; searching, in other words, for
what determines productivity and technical progress, and finding it in the ability of a firm, an
economy, a society to "learn" continuously,10 in dynamism, in endogenous inventiveness, in
the taste for intellectual and entrepreneurial challenges.11
Such ability may be found embedded in the culture and customs of a nation, as a result of a
favourable historical confluence. Or it can be constructed, fed, by reasoned political action,
as well as by entrepreneurs' creative impulse. This is a complex task that involves all the
different aspects of associative life, first and foremost the educational system; and not only
this, but also the legal system, the condition of competition and the efficiency of the public
administration.
And finance? The financial system can be an engine of prosperity or a cause of backsliding.
The history of economies, both old and new, has given us examples of one and the other
situation. The whole world is still reeling from the destructive potential that finance revealed
six years ago. It chooses how and where to distribute the resources: the incentives that
orient these choices influence economic growth.12
To be able to make these choices correctly, the financial system must "know" the corporate
system. But what does financial system mean? For an Anglo-American it basically means
markets, and the whole world of analysts, consultants, speculative investors and institutional
investors that wheel about them. For a European, and even more for an Italian, it means
banks. Markets and banks have different ways of knowing the firms that require finance.
Markets can only gather and process data. Banks, in addition to data, can acquire direct
knowledge of firms.
A mass of studies and analyses in the last quarter of a century have argued that a broad and
sophisticated financial system is essential for economic growth. It is a literature that is
considerably influenced by the Anglo-American model, which sees markets as the heart of
the system. After the "big chill" brought on by the global crisis, the basic assumption - the
importance of finance for growth - has not been eroded, but there have been increasing
qualifications and some rethinkings, for example on the recognition of an important role for
intermediation, especially in getting credit to SMEs.13
In Italy, as we have seen, the share of sources of funding other than bank credit is
particularly small and should certainly be encouraged to grow. Our traditional banking
activities can find new life, however, in a virtuous rediscovery of the mission to get to know
firms, in particular the smallest ones. All the mechanisms for gathering and analysing data on
firms need to be strengthened, including the ways in which that in formation is publicized and
shared. Banks must increase their level of technical knowledge, including expertise in
products, production methods, markets, about the firms applying for loans, particularly in this
recession, when loan applications tend to be for generic purposes and less tied to investment
plans, which are easier to evaluate objectively.14
We are moving towards a different financial system from the one we are used to. Policies,
laws and practices must be geared to allowing firms - especially innovative ones - to have
more of their own capital, paid in by the owners or from specialized funds, but also raised on
the capital market.15 For this reason Italian SMEs must take a decisive step towards ensuring
that information about their status is reliable and widely available. The level of bank debt will
have to be reduced.
Banks in turn must accelerate a change that has already begun for some of them. They too
are entering a new phase in which it is essential for them to be very well capitalized because
of the risks of which we are now all well aware: they must therefore satisfy the general
conditions of profitability, transparency and good governance that will allow them to obtain
funding at competitive rates (to pass on to lending rates, reducing them) and, if necessary, to
raise new capital rapidly and in sufficient quantity.
Besides improving their capacity to understand which companies to lend money to, they
must also add financial consultancy to their traditional lending activities, thus helping firms to
decide the best level and composition of their financial liabilities and supporting their entry to
the markets. These new services could build income streams that would at least offset the
loss of a part of traditional banking activities.
Conclusion
We Italians told ourselves from the outset that we were not to blame for the global financial
crisis, and it was true: on the eve of the flare-up, we had a financial and a banking system
that were largely immune to the problems famously discovered in the Anglo-American
systems.
Our fault was another: over the preceding decade we allowed the economy to lose strength
until it stopped growing, without taking steps to counter a trend whose deep and long-term
nature we ignored despite warnings from some quarters. The outcome is before our eyes: we
are one of the economies worst hit by the recessive effects of the financial crisis. We worry
about the timing and strength of the recovery, about how our country will fare in ten years'
time, about the employment prospects and future well-being of the generation on the
threshold of adulthood.
A prosperous society knows how to ensure a constant improvement in the quality of life of its
members. First and foremost by promoting employment, that is by creating the conditions so
that anyone who wants to work, especially at the start of adult life, can find or create a job
that is not too unpleasant or ill-paid and that as far as possible fulfils their vocation. Working
allows people to plan their future, to access a variety of high quality goods and services, and
to grow as a person.
This is what we should understand by "development": a constant, innovative increase in the
variety and quality of everything that makes life better, starting from a secure environment,
cultural heritage and natural landscape. A well-designed statistical system can calculate
national income in such a way as to include the quality of goods and services and not only
their quantity. In any case, a static vision of a society that can be crystallized in an eternal
present, maintaining resources and production capacity unchanged, is naive and has
repeatedly been disproved by history. Stasis is not possible: either we go forward or we will
decline, and only in the former case can we mitigate social inequalities.16
Economic policy today in the advanced countries must first distinguish the vicissitudes of the
economic cycle from structural trends and act on both with the appropriate instruments.
Employment is the first challenge. An important role in promoting employment and
participation in the labour market and aiming for levels and trends in pay that reconcile
competitiveness with workers' aspirations falls to both macroeconomic policies, aimed at
restoring steady expansion of aggregate demand and the economy, and structural policies
designed to remedy the age-old defects of the labour market and more generally of the
economic system, which pre-dated the crisis and were merely aggravated by its assault.17
Structural problems and policies are particularly significant in a number of countries,
including our own.
For our economy, the return to sustained development cannot be taken for granted, nor is it
easily within our reach. Italian history from the Renaissance to the present has witnessed
alternating periods of rapid progress and sometimes long phases of stagnation and decline.
However, we have no lack of energy, ideas and projects. The financial system is central to
the allocation of resources among alternative uses whose contribution to the productivity of
firms and the system must be evaluated; this, as I have tried to show in these remarks, is
another area of forthcoming structural changes to be assimilated and encouraged.
Confidence must be restored on all fronts, the tapestry of legislation, practices, and principles
that govern economic activity must be regenerated. The process has begun. We must all
become convinced that defending thousands of narrow individual interests, even when they
are legitimate, has to take second place where the ability of a national community to
generate its own progress is at stake.
References
Agenda possibile (2013), "Relazione del Gruppo di lavoro in materia economico-sociale ed
europea istituito il 30 marzo 2013 dal Presidente della Repubblica",
www.quirinale.it/qrnw/statico/attivita/consultazioni/c_20mar2013/gruppi_lavoro/2013-04-12_
agenda_possibile.pdf.
Aghion. P. and P. Howitt (1992), "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction",
Econometrica, 60(2).
Arrow, K. (1962), "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing", Review of Economic
Studies, 29.
Bain & Company and IIF (2013), Restoring financing and growth to Europe's SMEs,
www.bain.com/Images/REPORT_Restoring_financing_and_growth_to_Europe%27s_SMEs.
pdf.
Beck, T. (2013), Finance and growth: too much of a good thing ?, www.voxeu.org/
article/finance-and-growth .
CBI (2012), Financing for growth, http://www.cbi.org.uk/media/1673105/cbi_
financing_for_growth.pdf .
Criscuolo, C., P. N. Gal and C. Menon (2014), "The Dynamics of Employment Growth: New
Evidence from 18 Countries", OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers,
No. 14, OECD Publishing.
Draghi, M. (2014), Unemployment in the euro area,
www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2014/html/sp140822.en.html.
ECB (2014), Introductory statement to the press conference (with Q&A), 04/09/2014,
www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pressconf/2014/html/is140904.en.html.
Grossman, G. and E. Helpman (1991), Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy, MIT
Press.
Haselmann, R., K. Pistor and V. Vig (2010), "How law affects lending", Review of Financial
Studies, 23(2).
Levine, R. (2014), Finance, long-run growth, and economic opportunity,
http://www.voxeu.org/article/finance-long-run-growth-and-economic-opportunity.
Panetta, F. (2014), Un sistema finanziario per la crescita,
http://www.bancaditalia.it/interventi/intaltri_mdir/finanza_rossi/rossi_141113.pdf.
Phelps, E. (2013), Mass Flourishing, Princeton University Press.
Piketty, T. (2014), Capital in the 21st Century, Harvard University Press.
Romer, P. (1990), "Endogenous Technological Change", Journal of Political Economy,
98 (5).
Rossi, S. (2014), Finanza e crescita dopo la crisi, www.bancaditalia.it/interventi/intaltri_mdir/
finanza_rossi/rossi_141113.pdf .
Solow, R. M. (1956), "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth", Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 70 (1).
Solow, R. M. (1957), "Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function", Review of
Economics and Statistics, 39(3).
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934), Theory of Economic Development;
Stiglitz, J. and Weiss, A. (1981), "Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information",
The American Economic Review.
Stiglitz J. and B. Greenwald (2014), Creating a Learning Society: A New Approach to
Growth, Development, and Social Progress, Columbia University Press.
Visco, I. (2014), Considerazioni finali sul 2013, www.bancaditalia.it/interventi/integov/2014/
cf_13/cf_13/cf13_considerazioni_finali.pdf
VV. AA. (2013), Agenda possibile, Report by the Group on Socio-economic and European
Matters set up on 30 March 2013 by the President of the Republic of Italy,
www.quirinale.it/qrnw/statico/attivita/consultazioni/c_20mar2013/gruppi_lavoro/2013-04-12_
agenda_possibile.pdf.
Yellen, J.L. (2014), Labor Market Dynamics and Monetary Policy,
www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20140822a.htm.