The Indonesian Bank Crisis And Restructuring: Lessons And Implications For Other Developing Countries
Abstract
Drawing on the Indonesian experience in 1997, this paper demonstrates the complexity of managing banking crises deals. It aims at deriving conclusions from this experience for other developing countries facing similar problems. The paper also refers to comparative experiences of other countries, in particular Malaysia and Thailand, examines the IMF programme and reveals its shortcomings. The key question is to what extent the ineffectiveness and slow progress of bank restructuring, corporate restructuring and continued dilemmas in macroeconomic management in Indonesia were due to shortcomings of the economic programme, its sequencing or emphasis, and to what extent it has to be attributed other factors, including corruption and lack of policy-making capacity. Although prudential requirements and regulations, such as lending limits, were introduced to address corporate governance problems, governance of the banking sector was generally weak, and there was little incentive for banks to make appropriate risk assessments in their activities. It is shown that structural weaknesses precipitated and aggravated the crisis. There is clear evidence for mistakes in the initial responses to the crisis by both the Government and the international financial institutions. The most difficult problems facing a country like Indonesia are the political and social constraints to rapid restructuring and reforms to strengthen the financial sector. Indonesia was obliged to implement second generation Washington consensus reforms focusing on corporate governance, bankruptcy procedures, business-government relations, and more restrictive prudential regulation. A clear message of the paper is that a "one-size-fits-all" programme is unlikely to be successful. Policy makers must be able to address linkages between the financial sector and macroeconomic performance, which, if not managed appropriately, can exacerbate macroeconomic cycles. There is also a need to reduce the concentration of bank ownership and to minimize moral hazards through the design of clear exit mechanisms. Moreover, attempts to restructure the banking system can only be successful in the context of an overall recovery of the domestic economy. The main message of the paper is the importance of appropriate speed and sequencing of necessary reforms, taking due account of the institutional, legal and human capacities that are specific to each country. [English only] Drawing on the Indonesian experience in 1997, this paper demonstrates the complexity of managing banking crises deals. It aims at deriving conclusions from this experience for other developing countries facing similar problems. The paper also refers to comparative experiences of other countries, in particular Malaysia and Thailand, examines the IMF programme and reveals its shortcomings. The key question is to what extent the ineffectiveness and slow progress of bank restructuring, corporate restructuring and continued dilemmas in macroeconomic management in Indonesia were due to shortcomings of the economic programme, its sequencing or emphasis, and to what extent it has to be attributed other factors, including corruption and lack of policy-making capacity. Although prudential requirements and regulations, such as lending limits, were introduced to address corporate governance problems, governance of the banking sector was generally weak, and there was little incentive for banks to make appropriate risk assessments in their activities. It is shown that structural weaknesses precipitated and aggravated the crisis. There is clear evidence for mistakes in the initial responses to the crisis by both the Government and the international financial institutions. The most difficult problems facing a country like Indonesia are the political and social constraints to rapid restructuring and reforms to strengthen the financial sector. Indonesia was obliged to implement second generation Washington consensus reforms focusing on corporate governance, bankruptcy procedures, business-government relations, and more restrictive prudential regulation. A clear message of the paper is that a "one-size-fits-all" programme is unlikely to be successful. Policy makers must be able to address linkages between the financial sector and macroeconomic performance, which, if not managed appropriately, can exacerbate macroeconomic cycles. There is also a need to reduce the concentration of bank ownership and to minimize moral hazards through the design of clear exit mechanisms. Moreover, attempts to restructure the banking system can only be successful in the context of an overall recovery of the domestic economy. The main message of the paper is the importance of appropriate speed and sequencing of necessary reforms, taking due account of the institutional, legal and human capacities that are specific to each country. [English only] Drawing on the Indonesian experience in 1997, this paper demonstrates the complexity of managing banking crises deals. It aims at deriving conclusions from this experience for other developing countries facing similar problems. The paper also refers to comparative experiences of other countries, in particular Malaysia and Thailand, examines the IMF programme and reveals its shortcomings. The key question is to what extent the ineffectiveness and slow progress of bank restructuring, corporate restructuring and continued dilemmas in macroeconomic management in Indonesia were due to shortcomings of the economic programme, its sequencing or emphasis, and to what extent it has to be attributed other factors, including corruption and lack of policy-making capacity. Although prudential requirements and regulations, such as lending limits, were introduced to address corporate governance problems, governance of the banking sector was generally weak, and there was little incentive for banks to make appropriate risk assessments in their activities. It is shown that structural weaknesses precipitated and aggravated the crisis. There is clear evidence for mistakes in the initial responses to the crisis by both the Government and the international financial institutions. The most difficult problems facing a country like Indonesia are the political and social constraints to rapid restructuring and reforms to strengthen the financial sector. Indonesia was obliged to implement second generation Washington consensus reforms focusing on corporate governance, bankruptcy procedures, business-government relations, and more restrictive prudential regulation. A clear message of the paper is that a "one-size-fits-all" programme is unlikely to be successful. Policy makers must be able to address linkages between the financial sector and macroeconomic performance, which, if not managed appropriately, can exacerbate macroeconomic cycles. There is also a need to reduce the concentration of bank ownership and to minimize moral hazards through the design of clear exit mechanisms. Moreover, attempts to restructure the banking system can only be successful in the context of an overall recovery of the domestic economy. The main message of the paper is the importance of appropriate speed and sequencing of necessary reforms, taking due account of the institutional, legal and human capacities that are specific to each country. [English only] Drawing on the Indonesian experience in 1997, this paper demonstrates the complexity of managing banking crises deals. It aims at deriving conclusions from this experience for other developing countries facing similar problems. The paper also refers to comparative experiences of other countries, in particular Malaysia and Thailand, examines the IMF programme and reveals its shortcomings. The key question is to what extent the ineffectiveness and slow progress of bank restructuring, corporate restructuring and continued dilemmas in macroeconomic management in Indonesia were due to shortcomings of the economic programme, its sequencing or emphasis, and to what extent it has to be attributed other factors, including corruption and lack of policy-making capacity. Although prudential requirements and regulations, such as lending limits, were introduced to address corporate governance problems, governance of the banking sector was generally weak, and there was little incentive for banks to make appropriate risk assessments in their activities. It is shown that structural weaknesses precipitated and aggravated the crisis. There is clear evidence for mistakes in the initial responses to the crisis by both the Government and the international financial institutions. The most difficult problems facing a country like Indonesia are the political and social constraints to rapid restructuring and reforms to strengthen the financial sector. Indonesia was obliged to implement second generation Washington consensus reforms focusing on corporate governance, bankruptcy procedures, business-government relations, and more restrictive prudential regulation. A clear message of the paper is that a "one-size-fits-all" programme is unlikely to be successful. Policy makers must be able to address linkages between the financial sector and macroeconomic performance, which, if not managed appropriately, can exacerbate macroeconomic cycles. There is also a need to reduce the concentration of bank ownership and to minimize moral hazards through the design of clear exit mechanisms. Moreover, attempts to restructure the banking system can only be successful in the context of an overall recovery of the domestic economy. The main message of the paper is the importance of appropriate speed and sequencing of necessary reforms, taking due account of the institutional, legal and human capacities that are specific to each country. [English only] Drawing on the Indonesian experience in 1997, this paper demonstrates the complexity of managing banking crises deals. It aims at deriving conclusions from this experience for other developing countries facing similar problems. The paper also refers to comparative experiences of other countries, in particular Malaysia and Thailand, examines the IMF programme and reveals its shortcomings. The key question is to what extent the ineffectiveness and slow progress of bank restructuring, corporate restructuring and continued dilemmas in macroeconomic management in Indonesia were due to shortcomings of the economic programme, its sequencing or emphasis, and to what extent it has to be attributed other factors, including corruption and lack of policy-making capacity. Although prudential requirements and regulations, such as lending limits, were introduced to address corporate governance problems, governance of the banking sector was generally weak, and there was little incentive for banks to make appropriate risk assessments in their activities. It is shown that structural weaknesses precipitated and aggravated the crisis. There is clear evidence for mistakes in the initial responses to the crisis by both the Government and the international financial institutions. The most difficult problems facing a country like Indonesia are the political and social constraints to rapid restructuring and reforms to strengthen the financial sector. Indonesia was obliged to implement second generation Washington consensus reforms focusing on corporate governance, bankruptcy procedures, business-government relations, and more restrictive prudential regulation. A clear message of the paper is that a "one-size-fits-all" programme is unlikely to be successful. Policy makers must be able to address linkages between the financial sector and macroeconomic performance, which, if not managed appropriately, can exacerbate macroeconomic cycles. There is also a need to reduce the concentration of bank ownership and to minimize moral hazards through the design of clear exit mechanisms. Moreover, attempts to restructure the banking system can only be successful in the context of an overall recovery of the domestic economy. The main message of the paper is the importance of appropriate speed and sequencing of necessary reforms, taking due account of the institutional, legal and human capacities that are specific to each country.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Paper provided by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in its series G-24 Discussion Papers with number 23.Length:
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:unc:g24pap:23
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Palais des Nations, CH - 1211 Geneva 10
Phone: +41 22 907 12 34
Fax: +41 22 907 00 43
Email:
Web page: http://www.unctad.org
More information through EDIRC
Related research
Keywords:References
References listed on IDEASPlease report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Leslie Teo & Charles Enoch & Carl-Johan Lindgren & Tomás J. T. Baliño & Anne Marie Gulde & Marc Quintyn, 2000. "Financial Sector Crisis and Restructuring:Lessons from Asia," IMF Occasional Papers 188, International Monetary Fund.
- James R. Barth & Gerard Caprio Jr. & Ross Levine, 2002.
"Financial Regulation and Performance: Cross-COuntry Evidence,"
Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies Book Series,
in: Leonardo Hernández & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel & Norman Loayza (Series Editor) & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel (S (ed.), Banking, Financial Integration, and International Crises, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 4, pages 113-142
Central Bank of Chile.
- Barth, James R. & Caprio Jr., Gerard & Levine, Ross, 1999. "Financial regulation and performance : cross-country evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2037, The World Bank.
- James R. Barth & Gerard Caprio Jr. & Ross Levine, 2001. "Financial Regulation And Performance: Cross-Country Evidence," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 118, Central Bank of Chile.
- Enrica Detragiache & Asli Demirgüç-Kunt, 1998.
"Financial Liberalization and Financial Fragility,"
IMF Working Papers
98/83, International Monetary Fund.
- Demirguc-Kent, Asli & Detragiache, Enrica, 1998. "Financial liberalization and financial fragility," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1917, The World Bank.
- Masahiro Kawai, 2001. "Bank and Corporate Restructuring in Crisis-Affected East Asia: From Systemic Collapse to Reconstruction," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 317, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Caprio, Gerard & Honohan, Patrick, 2001. "Finance for Growth: Policy Choices in a Volatile World," MPRA Paper 9929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Ross McLeod, 1999. "Crisis-Driven Changes to the Banking Laws and Regulations," Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 147-154.
Citations
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:unc:g24pap:23For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Juan Pizarro).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

