lael brainard : is economics for me? increasing the participation of black women in economics speech by ms lael brainard, member of the board of governors of the federal reserve system, at the sadie t. m. alexander conference for economics, washington dc, 23 february 2019. * * * it is an honor to be a part of the inaugural sadie t. m. alexander conference in economics and related fields. i want to thank each of you in this room and those of you livestreaming who form the sadie collective. special thanks go to mykelle richburg, kayla jones, olusayo adeleye, george - ann ryan, jada houser, fanta traore, and anna gifty opoku - agyeman for taking the initiative and launching this organization and this conference to increase the representation of black women in the field of economics. i applaud your efforts, and i support your mission. 1 the story of dr. sadie tanner mossell alexander is an inspiration for us all. a woman of firsts — the first african american to receive a ph. d. in economics and the first woman to receive a law degree from the university of pennsylvania — she was a pioneer who knocked down some daunting doors. the question for the women in this room here today is whether you will follow her through those doors and maybe knock down a few of your own. the need for greater diversity let me start by making two observations about economics. first, the field of economics is rooted in evidence and research. the second observation follows strongly from the research and the evidence : economics has a diversity challenge. there is a stubbornly persistent lack of diversity in the economics profession. 2 year after year, minorities and women are underrepresented in the pool of individuals awarded a doctorate in economics in the united states relative to their share in the broader population, and the gap is especially acute for women of color. the american economic association reports that in the 2016 – 17 academic year, seven black / african american women were awarded a doctorate in economics in the united states, along with eight black / african american men, out of a total pool of 1, 150 economics ph. d.'s awarded overall. the economics diversity gap starts even earlier. as amanda bayer and david wilcox have documented, women and minorities are also underrepresented in undergraduate economics programs. from 2011 to 2015, women accounted for only 31 percent of undergraduate degrees in economics — substantially below their

it has created hold regular competitive events like the hackathon to provide a channel for the fintech and start - up sector to showcase innovations. non - disruptive innovation 7. no regulator has the luxury of letting innovation disrupt the financial system in the hope that market might reach its own equilibrium eventually. for instance, we cannot afford to let loose defi technologies on the financial institutions with virtually no understanding of how a bank - less system would operate. apart from the unacceptable financial stability risks, this would amount to a regulator working towards its own irrelevance. it is necessary that a regulator controls the manner and pace of absorption of new technology. allowing disruptive technology without clarity on whether the alternative is even feasible, let alone desirable, would be an unacceptable gamble. a key element for smooth absorption of new technology is to ensure a level playing field. if offering credit cards requires a banking ( or similar ) licence, allowing a non - licensed entity to offer them would amount to undermining the banking system, as it would be placed at a competitive disadvantage. similarly, digital payments are essentially a banking service in the sense that they involve movement of funds from one deposit account to another. deposit accounts are a necessity, technology merely a tool ; deposit accounts can be used to make payments even without technology, but not the other way round. facilitating a non - bank to use its technology to move bank deposits would amount to creating a competitive edge for the non - bank. it may be argued that nonbanks could avoid use of bank deposits by maintaining deposit like funds, say, wallets. then non - banks would be deposit taking entities, that is, they would be effectively banks which would require a banking licence. a less disruptive and more efficient mechanism is to facilitate banks to collaborate ( or acquire ) the new technology. banks could also outsource or internalise the new technology. would it disincentivise innovation? not likely, if the non - bank technology is appropriately priced. 8. this brings us to the key issue of regulatory arbitrage. if we want to avoid the inefficiencies caused by differential regulations for similar activities, a non - bank undertaking banking functions, needs to be licensed and regulated like a bank. without the license, it should not be allowed to undertake banking activities. this for example, is what rbi did recently when it clarified that ppis ( prepaid payment instruments ) cannot be funded out of credit lines, because it enabled an