Thailand « FiNETIK – Asia and Latin America

August 27, 2010 • 11:30 pm 0

Mexico: safer than Canada ? safer than Brazil!

K, so the headline is a bit of a fib. But a report on Mexico’s security situation has painted a more detailed picture than the one we hear about in the news most of the time. When I told friends I was moving to Mexico City, some asked if I would be provided with a bodyguard (no). Business travellers are thinking twice about coming, according to chambers of commerce here. But a detailed breakdown of violence released this week shows that, if you pick your state, you’re as safe—or safer—than in any other North American country.

Mexico’s overall homicide rate is 14 per 100,000 inhabitants: fearsomely high (and possibly an underestimate, given the drugs cartels’ habit of hiding bodies in old mines), but quite a lot lower than its great Latin rival Brazil, whose rate is more like 25. As the chart below shows, Mexico’s death rate is bumped up by extraordinarily high levels of violence in four states: Chihuahua (home of Ciudad Juárez, widely labelled the world’s most murderous city), Durango, Sinaloa and Guerrero (see p.29 of this document). Of the rest, some are blissfully serene: Yucatán, where tourists flock to swim with whale sharks and clamber over Chichen Itzá, has a murder rate of 1.7—slightly lower than Canada’s average of 2.1.

Read full article in the Economist

Before I am buried an avalanche of polite Canadian emails, I should acknowledge that comparing an entire country with one quiet state is hardly fair: there are no doubt parts of Canada where no-one has been so much as kicked in the shin for decades. But Mexico’s predicament is worth highlighting, because the extreme violence around its border with the United States colours people’s view of the rest of the country, though much of it is pretty quiet. A third of Mexico’s states hover around 5 murders per 100,000, about the same rate as the United States. Another third are around 8 per 100,000, similar to Thailand, for instance. A handful of states have rates in the teens—like Russia, say—and a couple are in the low twenties, a little lower than Brazil’s average. Then you have the chaos of the four very violent states, which sends the average soaring.

The carnage in Mexico’s badlands is not to be underestimated, and nor does it seem to be getting any better. Business travellers should certainly watch out in places such as Juárez and, these days, even in cities such as Monterrey. But people doing business south of the Rio Grande should remember that, even on average, Mexico is a less murderous country than places such as Brazil, and that once you avoid the hotspots, it’s downright safe.

Source: The Economist, 27.08.2010

Filed under: Brazil, Latin America, Mexico, News, Thailand , Brazil, Canada, Latin America, Mexico, Risk Management, Russia, Security, Thailand, USA

December 11, 2009 • 8:28 am 0

ETF: BlackRock ETF Landscape Industry Review November 2009

BlackRock has just published the November 2009 edition of its monthly ETF Landscape Industry Review. This report is a review of the Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and Exchange Traded Products (ETPs) industry through the end of October 2009.

At the end of October 2009 the global ETF industry had 1,859 ETFs with 3,327 listings and assets of US$941.85, from 97 providers on 40 exchanges around the world.

Download report hereBlack Rock ETF Lamdscape November 2009

Source: MondoVisione, 11.12.2009

Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Latin America, Library, Malaysia, Mexico, News, Risk Management, Singapore, Thailand , Latin America, Asia, Exchanges, Commodities, Derivatives, ETF, Index, iShares, FOREX, Performance Report, Equity, Blackrock, ETC Exchange Traded Commodities

November 19, 2009 • 9:56 am 0

Asia:NPLs and SMEs to provide distressed opportunities

Distressed specialists define their terminology and give their take on the market at the second AsianInvestor/FinanceAsia Distressed and Troubled Asset Investing Summit, held in Tokyo.

“What exactly is distress?” reflected AsianInvestor editor Jame DiBiasio at a panel he moderated on Monday at the Tokyo Distressed and Troubled Asset Investing Summit. “Is it a good asset from a distressed seller, or an asset itself that is in bad shape?”

The panel of distressed experts plumped for the former — they want good assets that are being flogged off by an imperilled owner.

“We prefer something that requires re-engineering, assuming that there is some enterprise value left,” said Steve Moyer, a portfolio manager at Pimco. “Banks couldn’t afford to take the losses on clearing portfolios of loans until they rebuild capital. That accomplished, they can begin the process.”

Edwin Wong, a former distressed-investing managing director at Lehman Brothers, and regarded by some in those halcyon days as the finest exponent of distressed investing practice in the hemisphere, recently started his own fund management company, SSG Capital Management.

“Unlike the Asian crisis of the late 1990s, in which all sizes of companies went bankrupt, we’re not seeing it this time around so much with the big companies,” he said. “However, private companies and smaller corporates have built up a lot of leverage, and that’s where we see the main opportunity in China, India and Indonesia.”

In answer to the old conundrum ‘what is the most famous thing that Belgium has ever produced?’, perhaps Michel Lowy will be a contender, if his new firm SC Lowy succeeds.

Lowy says distressed investors have been sharpening their pencils for the past 18 months, expecting lots of deals, only to be disappointed by the available opportunities. He hopes that will change as commercial banks finally bite the bullet and sell off non-performing portfolios.

He also perceives differences geographically in the structure of opportunities on offer. “In North Asia and other sophisticated Asian economies, there is a weighting towards public companies,” Lowy says. “Elsewhere in Asia, there are more family-owned companies. The latter are often in places where the creditor has more limited rights. It’s going to be harder to gain control of a company there by converting debt to equity.”

Source: AsianInvestor.net, 18.11.2009

Filed under: Asia, Australia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, News, Risk Management, Services, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam , Japan, Asia, China 中国, Risk Management, NPL Non Performing Loan, Distress Debt

November 17, 2009 • 9:14 am 0

China and India – Himalayas, Water and growing conflicts

The brewing disputes and growing concerns of the Himalayan Region by worlds two most populus nations, is a further indication of increasing dangers of latent resource wars, particularly on water. The continuing desertification in China and migration to coastal region increase pressure. While planned deviation of water ways to Chinese low lands could severely affect South- and South East Asia, see also

Political Hands across the Himalayas, FT, 15.11.2009

Excerpt: India and China are touted as white knights coming to the rescue of the world economy. Considerable hope rests on these two countries, with fast-paced growth, developing domestic markets and high savings rates, reviving demand and leading other languishing parts of the world out of recession.

The two rising powers, however, may yet be clashing knights. For in New Delhi it is fear of Beijing, rather than partnership, that all too frequently characterises the trans-Himalayan relationship. While some size up trade balances and growth trajectories, others are measuring missile ranges and comparing military parades.

Mr Mishra advised Atul Behari Vajpayee, the former premier. His views, albeit hawkish, are respected by the current Congress party-led government and carry weight with the diplomatic community.

So his recent forecast that India might face a second military front within five years turned heads. The former intelligence chief predicted that India could find itself locked in an armed stand-off simultaneously with Beijing and Pakistan, the traditional rival.

Mr Mishra’s suspicions of China have been newly aroused by Beijing’s warm relationship with Islamabad and its supply of military hardware to Pakistan’s army.

They have also been stoked by territorial claims to Arunachal Pradesh, a north-eastern Indian state, and predictions on Chinese websites that India, a country of huge diversity, is doomed to fall apart.

Mr Mishra says China’s stridency in its territorial ambitions has grown over the past two years to a level not seen since the early 1960s. Moreover, he accuses China of trying to bring into question India’s sovereignty over the state at the international level.

Military strategists interpret China’s policies as a regional power play. They say that tying India up within its own borders prevents it from projecting itself in the region and rivalling China.

In spite of the fighting talk in India, the relationship between India and China holds much more potential than antagonism. China’s impressive record of infrastructure development and lifting people out of poverty holds lessons for India. Likewise, India’s democratic credentials and inclusiveness are instructive to China.

Read full article hear: 15.11. 2009 by James Lamont in New Delhi

The high stakes of melting Himalayan glaciers, CNN 05.10.2009

Execerpt – The glaciers in the Himalayas are receding quicker than those in other parts of the world and could disappear altogether by 2035 according to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. The result of this deglaciation could be conflict as Himalayan glacial runoff has an essential role in the economies, agriculture and even religions of the regions countries.

Satellite data from the Indian Space Applications Center, in Ahmedabad, India, indicates that from 1962 to 2004, more than 1,000 Himalayan glaciers have retreated by around 16 percent. According to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China’s glaciers have shrunk by 5 percent since 1950s.

Dr. Vandana Shiva, an environmental activist, physicist and leader in the International Forum on Globalization, has just returned from a “Climate Yatra,” a research journey to the Himalayas to study the impact of climate change and the glacial melt upon communities in Asia.

“Himalayan rivers support nearly half of humanity,” Dr. Shiva told CNN. “Everyone who depends on water from the Himalayas will be affected.”

Both India and China are exploring opportunities to harness Himalayan waters for hydroelectric power projects, and while the initial melt promises to provide plenty of water for both sides, the loss of glaciers could lead to water shortages further in the future.

Water-related conflicts have already been witnessed in other parts of the globe such as in the West Bank and in Darfur.

According to Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, almost 70 percent of the non-monsoon flows in almost all the Himalayan rivers come from glacier melt.

International water security issues within Asia could be likely since the waters of the Indus, Ganges and the Brahmaptura basins flow into China in the upstream, and are shared across South Asia in the downstream.

Dr. Shiva believes the situation will render major security issues, between India and China particularly, as flows reduce and demands intensify.

Read full article here: CNN, 05.10.2009

In retreat: the roof of the world is experiencing rapid summer melting.

Filed under: Asia, China, India, Malaysia, News, Risk Management, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam , China 中国, India, ASEAN, Climate, Black Swan, Agriculture, Environment, Risk Management, Confidence Crisis, Politics, Social Crisis, 2012, Resource Crisis, Himalaya Region

November 12, 2009 • 10:37 am 2

Global warming threat for Asia financial hubs – Yangtze ‘facing climate threat’

The report, produced by WWF, the environmental pressure group, puts the two financial hubs in the top 10 cities threatened by climate change in Asia, the region widely believed to be most vulnerable to rising global temperatures.

It warns that Hong Kong is in danger from higher sea levels, which are likely to rise 40cm-60cm in China’s Pearl River delta by 2050, increasing the area of coastline that is vulnerable to flooding by up to six times.

Costs imposed by typhoons are also likely to rise dramatically, the report says, noting that 14 of the 21 extreme storm surges between 1950 and 2004 occurred after 1986.

The number of nights when Hong Kong temperatures rise above 28°C has risen almost fourfold since the 1960s, while the number of winter nights when the temperature falls below 12°C is predicted to fall from an average of 21 to zero within 50 years.

For Singapore, the report says, the sea level is forecast to rise by 60cm by the end of the century, eroding coastal protection and decreasing the shoreline of the city state, making it more vulnerable to storm surges and flooding.

The report says climate change could also increase the prevalence of dengue fever. The number of cases has been rising in periodic outbreaks and the last significant peak, in 2007, saw the third highest number of outbreaks ever.

Dhaka, the Bangladeshi capital, heads the list of the most vulnerable cities, mainly because of its position in a big river delta already subject to periodic flooding, its low average height above sea level and its poverty, which makes protection and adaptation more difficult.

Other cities at risk include Jakarta and Manila, which rank equal second, Calcutta and Phnom Penh, which are equal third, Ho Chi Minh and Shanghai, equal fourth, Bangkok, fifth, and Kuala Lumpur, which ties with Hong Kong and Singapore for sixth place.

The report calls on developed countries to agree to shoulder the bulk of the costs required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to finance an adaptation fund to pay for changes required in developing countries, and to provide recompense for losses and damage caused by climate-related catastrophes.

However, the report also says that vulnerable cities and national governments should take action themselves, including better management of coastal habitats and ecosystems.

The report is timed to influence the 21 heads of government attending this week’s Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in Singapore, before the global climate change summit in Copenhagen next month.

Source: FT, 11.11 2009 by Kevin Brown in Singapore

The Yangtze river basin is being increasingly affected by extreme weather and its ecosystems are under threat, environmentalists say.

In a new report, WWF-China says the temperature in the basin area of China’s longest river has risen steadily over the past two decades.

This has led to an increase in flooding, heat waves and drought.

Further temperature rises will have a disastrous effect on biodiversity in and along the river, the report says.

The WWF – formerly known as the World Wildlife Fund – predicts that in the next 50 years temperatures will go up by between 1.5C and 2C.

The group’s report is the largest assessment yet of the impact of global warming on the Yangtze River Basin, where about 400 million people live.

Data was collected from 147 monitoring stations. The report’s lead researcher, Xu Ming, said the forthcoming Copenhagen negotiations on climate change would have an obvious and direct influence on the Yangtze.

“Controlling the future emissions of greenhouse gases will benefit the Yangtze river basin, at the very least from the perspective of drought and water resources,” he said.

The report says the predicted weather events and temperature rises will lead to declines in crop production, and rising sea levels will make coastal cities such as Shanghai vulnerable.

Some of the problems could be averted by strengthening river reinforcements, and switching to hardier crops, its authors suggest.

Source: BBC, 10.11.2009

Filed under: Asia, China, Energy & Environment, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, News, Risk Management, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam , Japan, Asia, China 中国, Vietnam, India, Singapore, Bangkok, Commodities, Hong Kong, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Tokyo, Climate, Asia Strategy, Shanghai, Agriculture, Environment, Risk Management, Confidence Crisis, Bangladesh, 2012, Jakarta, Manila, Calcutta, Yangtze River

November 11, 2009 • 4:48 am 0

Why China and Japan Need an East Asia Bloc

Withering exports and asset bubbles have forced Asians – especially China and Japan — to work harder at free trade pacts.

All kinds of proposals have been floated about creating an Asian bloc a la European Union. Bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements (FTA) have been suggested for various combinations of Asian countries. Lately, there’s been a flurry of new ideas as Japan’s recently installed DPJ government seeks to differentiate from the ousted LDP.

By promoting ideas that lean toward Asia, DPJ’s leadership is signaling that Japan wants less dependence on the United States. This position offers a hope for the future to Japanese people, whose economy has been comatose for two decades. Closer integration with Asian neighbors could restore growth in Japan.

Whenever global trade gets into trouble, Asian countries talk about regional cooperation as an alternative growth driver. But typically these talks die out as soon as global trade recovers. Today’s chatter is following the same old pattern, although this time global trade is not on track to recover to previous levels and sustain East Asia’s export model. Thus, some sort of regional integration is needed to revive regional growth.

Which regional organization is in a position to lead an integration movement? Certainly not ASEAN, which is too small, nor APEC, which is too big. Something more is needed – like a bloc rooted in a trade pact between Japan and China.

ASEAN’s members are 10 countries in Southeast Asia with a population exceeding 600 million and a combined GDP of US$ 1.5 trillion in 2008. The group embraced an FTA process called AFTA in 1992, which accelerated after the 1997-’98 Asian Financial Crisis and competition with China heated up. When AFTA began, few gave it much chance for success, given the region’s huge disparities in per capita income and economic systems. Today AFTA is almost a reality, which is certainly a miracle.

ASEAN has succeeded beyond its wildest dreams. These days China, Japan, and South Korea join annual meetings as dialogue partners, while the European Union and United States participate in regional forums and bilateral discussions.

China and ASEAN completed FTA negotiations last year, demonstrating that they can function as an economic bloc. Now, China is ASEAN’s third largest trading partner. Indeed, there is a great upside for economic cooperation between the two.

Before the Asian Financial Crisis, the ASEAN region was touted as a “miracle” by international financial institutions for maintaining high GDP growth rates for more than two decades. But some of that growth was built on a bubble that diverted business away from production and toward asset speculation. This developed after credit expansion, driven by the pegging of regional currencies to the U.S. dollar, encouraged land speculation. ASEAN’s emerging economies absorbed massive cross-border capital due to a weak dollar, which slumped after the Federal Reserve responded to a U.S. banking crisis in the early 1990s by maintaining low interest rates.

Back then, I visited companies in the region that produced goods for export. I found that, despite all the talk of miracles, many were making money on financial games — not business. At that time, China was building an export sector that had started exerting downward pressure on tradable goods prices. Instead of focusing on competitiveness, the region hid behind a financial bubble and postponed a resolution. Indeed, ASEAN’s GDP was higher than China’s before the Asian financial crunch; now China’s GDP is three times ASEAN’s.

China today faces challenges similar to those confronting ASEAN before the crisis. While visiting manufacturers in China, I’ve often been discovering that their profits come from property development, lending or outright speculation. While asset prices rise, these practices are effectively subsidizing manufacturing operations – an asset game that can work wonderfully in the short term, as the U.S. experience demonstrates. When property and stock markets are worth more than twice GDP, 20 percent appreciation would be equivalent to four years of business profits in a normal economy. You can’t blame businesses for shifting their attention to the asset game in a bubbly environment. Yet as they focus on finance rather than manufacturing, their competitiveness erodes. And you know where that leads.

I digress from the main focus for this article — regional integration, not China’s bubble challenge.

So let’s look again at ASEAN’s success. In part, this reflects its soft image: Other major players do not view ASEAN as a competitive threat. Rather, the FTA with China has put pressure on majors such as India and Japan to pursue their own FTAs with ASEAN. Another dimension is that the region’s annual meetings have become important occasions for representatives from China, Japan and South Korea to sit down together.

In contrast to ASEAN’s success, APEC has been an abject failure.
Today, it’s simply a photo opportunity for leaders of member countries from the Americas, Oceania, Russia and Asia. APEC was set up after the Soviet bloc collapsed, and served a psychological purpose during the post-Cold War transition. It was reassuring for the global community to see leaders of former enemy countries shaking hands.

However, APEC is just too big and diverse to provide a foundation for building a trade structure. So general is the scope that anything APEC members agree upon would probably pass the United Nations. Now, two decades after end of the Cold War, APEC has clearly outlived its usefulness and is withering, although it may never shut down. APEC’s annual summit still offers leaders of member countries a venue for meetings on the sidelines to discuss bilateral issues. Maybe the group is useful in this way, offering an efficient venue for multiple summits concurrently.

Although ASEAN has succeeded with its own agenda, and achieved considerable success in relation to non-member countries, it clearly cannot assume the same role as the European Union. Besides, should Asia have an EU-like organization? Asia, by definition, clearly cannot. It’s a geographic region that includes the sub-continent, Middle East and central Asia. Any organization that encompasses Asia as a whole would be as unwieldy as APEC.

I am always puzzled by the word “Asia,” which the Greeks coined. In his classic work Histories, it seems ancient Greek historian Herodotus primarily referred to Asia Minor — today’s Turkey, and perhaps Syria — as Asia. I haven’t read much Greek, but I don’t recall India being included in ancient Greek references. So as far as I can determine, there is no internal logic to treating Asia as a region. It seems to encompass all places that are neither European nor African. Africa is a coherent continent, and Europe has a shared cultural past. Asia belongs to neither, so it shouldn’t be considered an organic entity.

Malaysia’s former prime minister Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad Mahathir was a strong supporter of an East Asia Economic Caucus (EAEC) which would have been comprised of ASEAN nations plus China, Japan and South Korea. But because Japan refused to participate in an organization that excluded the United States, the idea failed.

Yet there is some logic to Mahathir’s proposal. East Asia has a shared history, and intra-regional trade goes back centuries. Population movements have been significant, and as tourism takes off, regional relations should strengthen. One could envision a future marked by free-flowing capital, goods and labor in the region.

Yet differences among the region’s countries are much greater than in Europe. ASEAN’s overall per capita income is US$ 2,000, while it’s US$ 3,500 in China and US$ 40,000 in Japan. China, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam share Confucianism and Mahayana Buddhism, while most Southeast Asian countries embrace Islam or Hinayana Buddhism, and generally are more religious. I think an EU-like organization in East Asia would be very hard to establish, but something less restrictive would be possible.

Because Japan turned down Mahathir’s EAEC idea, there was a lot of interest when recently elected Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s proposed something similar – an East Asia Community — at a recent ASEAN summit. Hatoyama failed to clarify the role of the United States in any such organization. If the United States is included, it would not fly, as it would be too similar to APEC. Nor could such an organization be like the EU. But if Japan is fully committed, the new group could assume substance over time.

The Japanese probably proposed the community idea for domestic political reasons. Yet the fundamental case for Japan to increase integration with the rest of Asia and away from the United States grows stronger every day. Despite high per capita income, Japan remains an export-oriented economy, having missed an opportunity to develop a consumption-led economy in the 1980s and ’90s. In the foolish belief that rising property prices would spread wealth beyond the industrial heartland in the Tokyo-Osaka corridor, the government of former Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka pursued a high-price land policy, discouraging the middle class from pursuing a consumer lifestyle as they saved for property purchases.

Even more seriously, high property prices have been a major reason for Japan’s rapidly declining birth rate, as land prices inflated living costs. Now, facing a declining population and public debt twice GDP, Japan has few options for rejuvenating the economy by promoting domestic demand. It needs trade if it hopes to achieve any growth at all. Without growth, Japan will sooner or later suffer a public debt crisis.

Japan’s property experience offers a major lesson for China. Every Chinese city is copying the Hong Kong model — raising money from an increasingly expensive land market to fund urban development, leading to rapid urbanization. But this is borrowing growth from the future. Rising land prices lead to rising costs and, hence, slower growth and the same rapid decline in the birth rate that Japan experienced. Unless China reverses its high-land price policy, the consequences will be even more disastrous than in Japan or Hong Kong, as China shifted to the asset game much earlier in its development.

Yet I digress again. The point is that Japan has a strong and genuine case that favors more integration with East Asia. The United States is unlikely to recover soon and with enough strength to feed Japan’s export machine again. There is no more room for fiscal stimulus. Devaluing the yen to gain market share is not an option as long as Washington pursues a weak dollar policy. Without a new source of trade, Japan’s economy is doomed. Closer integration with East Asia is the only way out.

In addition to Hatoyama’s EAC proposal, a study jointly sponsored by China, Japan and South Korea is considering the possibility of a FTA. Of course, ASEAN could offer a template for any new East Asian bloc. ASEAN has signed an FTA with China and is talking with Japan and South Korea. If they all sign, regional integration would be halfway completed.

Whatever proposals for East Asian integration, the key issue is a possible FTA between China and Japan. Adding other parties avoids this main issue. China and Japan together are six times ASEAN’s size and 10 times South Korea’s. Without a China-Japan FTA, no combination in East Asia would truly support regional integration.

Five years ago, I wrote an op-ed piece for the Financial Times entitled China and Japan: Natural Partners. At the time, a prevailing sentiment was that China and Japan were antithetical: Both were still manufacturing export-led economies and could only gain at the other’s expense. I saw complementary demographics and capital: Japan had a declining labor force and China needed to employ tens of millions of youths migrating to cities from the countryside. China needed capital and Japan had surplus capital. And their trade relations indeed tightened, as Japan had increased the Chinese share of its overall trade to 17.4 percent in 2008 from 10.4 percent in ’04.

Today, the situation has changed. China has a capital surplus rather than a shortage. Demographic complementarity is still good and could last another decade. As China shifts its development model from resource intensive to environmentally friendly, a new complementarity is emerging. Japan has already made the transition, and its technologies that supported the transition need a new market such as China’s. So even without a new trade agreement, bilateral trade will continue growing.

An FTA between China and Japan would significantly accelerate their trade, resulting in an efficiency gain of more than US$ 1 trillion. Japan’s aging population lends urgency to increasing the investment returns. On the other hand, as China prepares to make a numerical commitment to limiting greenhouse gas emissions at the upcoming Copenhagen summit on global warming, heavy investment and rapid restructuring are needed for its economy. Japanese technology could come in quite handy.

More importantly, a China-Japan FTA would lay a foundation for an East Asian free trade bloc. The region has a population of 2.1 billion and a GDP of US$ 13 trillion, rivaling the European Union and United States. Blessed with a low base, plenty of capital, sound technology and a huge market, the region’s GDP could easily double in a decade.

Trade and technology are twin engines of growth and prosperity. No boom is sustained without one or the other. And when they come together, the boom can be massive. Prosperity seen over the past decade, for example, is due to information technology along with the opening up of China and other former planned economies. But these factors have been absorbed, forcing the world to find another engine. An integration of East Asian economies would be significant enough to play this role.

The best approach would be for China and Japan to negotiate a comprehensive FTA that encompasses free-flowing goods, services and capital. This task may appear too difficult, but recent changes have made it possible. The two countries should give it a try.

It would be wrong to begin by working out an FTA that includes China, Japan and South Korea. That would triple the task’s level of difficulty, especially since South Korea doesn’t have a meaningful FTA with any country. To imagine that the Seoul government would cut a deal with China or Japan is naive. China and Japan should negotiate bilaterally.

A key issue is that China and Japan should put economics before politics. If the DPJ government wants to gain popularity by increasing international influence rather than boosting the economy, then all the current speculation and discussion about an East Asia bloc would be for nothing. But if DPJ wants to sustain power by rejuvenating Japan’s moribund economy, chances for a deal are good.

While Japan is talking, China should be doing. China should aggressively initiate the FTA process with Japan. Regardless of China’s current difficulties, its growth potential and vast market are what Japan will never have at home nor anywhere else. Hence, China would be able to compromise from a position of strength.

Some may say a free trade area for East Asia is beyond reach. However, history belongs to the daring. The world has changed enough to make it possible. China and Japan should seize the opportunity.

Source: Caijing, 10.11.2009 by Andy Xie, guest economist to Caijing and a board member of Rosetta Stone Advisors Ltd.

Full article in Chinese

Filed under: Asia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, News, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam , Japan, Asia, SGX Singapore Stock Exchange, Exchanges, China 中国, Vietnam, India, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Korea, ASEAN, Asset Management, Middle East, Export, Import, Trade, Agriculture, Risk Management, Politics, Exportacion a Asia, Real Estate, Manufacture, Regulators, Caijing, Andy Xie

October 23, 2009 • 9:49 am 1

ASEAN markets cross trading links in demand – TABB Group

In new equity markets research published today, TABB Group says US and European demand for electronic linkage to Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) exchanges is strong and primed to expand, as seamless access will attract brokers already trading in other parts of Asia. However, there is a wide range of needs across the different market segment, including direct market access (DMA), low-cost versus real-time market data, advanced order types, and reliable trading platforms.

TABB’s senior analyst Kevin McPartland, who authored the ASEAN Equity Markets Pinpoint report, an industry update on equity trading in the ASEAN region covering the Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore exchanges, says the global financial crisis had little impact on growing buy-side demand for trading in ASEAN markets.

“More seamless access will drive brokers already operating in other parts of Asia to begin trading in the ASEAN markets,” he says, with the sell side set to benefit most from that seamless access. Explaining that the availability of real-time market data is crucial for all trading in the ASEAN markets, and that real time data is a requirement for the sell side even when trade volumes are low or non-existent, he adds, “High costs and time zones do tend to limit buy-side market data usage outside of the region.”

Addressing the relationship between the buy side and sell side, McPartland says that although no single broker currently dominates across all Asian markets, over 90% of buy-side firms are unwilling to give brokers full discretion over their orders. However, while the buy side does look to their brokers for market access, they agree that more seamless access would lower costs for execution and market data. There is also significant support for the idea of central ASEAN execution venue, McPartland adds.

The report’s in-depth coverage includes 24 charts:

Support for a central ASEAN venue
Improving ASEAN trading
Sell-side interest in ASEAN linkage
% of bulge-bracket participants trading in each market
Impact of the financial crisis on ASEAN interest
Roadblocks to sell-side trading in ASEAN markets
Buy-side broker usage – all Asia ·
Buy-side broker usage – ASEAN markets
Top brokers by country (by # of mentions)
Bulge-bracket participants trading in each market
Mid-tier participants trading in each market
Buy-side interest in a seamless ASEAN linkage
Roadblocks to buy-side access of ASEAN markets
Average number of buy-side orders per week
Average blended commission rates (bps)
% for which counterparty risk is an issue
Importance of each component when trading in ASEAN markets
Markets providing real-time market data to sell side
Market data sources for sell side
Markets providing real-time market data to buy side
Reasons for buy side’s lack of market data
How the buy side trades ASEAN markets
% of buy side using multiple data providers ·
Sell-side and buy-side market data providers

TABB Group collected data through interviews with heads of electronic trading from 12 top global broker-dealers, 9 hedge funds and 14 institutional asset managers. On the buy side, participants had combined global assets under management (AuM) of approximately $6 trillion and are currently trading in Asia from slightly under $10 million to over $5 billion monthly.

Source: MondoVisione, 23.10.2009

Filed under: Asia, Data Management, Exchanges, Indonesia, Malaysia, Market Data, News, Singapore, Thailand, Trading Technology, Vietnam , Trading Hubs, Trading Network, Trade Connectivity, SGX Singapore Stock Exchange, Exchanges, Market Data, SET, DMA Direct Market Access, Vietnam, HOSE Ho Chi Ming Stock Exchange, HaSTC Hanoi Stock Exchange, Singapore, Bursa, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, IDX, ASEAN, ATS Alternative Trading Systems, Brokerage Firms, TABB Group

October 14, 2009 • 11:19 am 0

Asia’s affluent lose one-fifth of wealth in 2008 – CapGemini-Merryll Lynch Asia Wealth Report 2009

Hong Kong’s high-net-worth crowd were the hardest hit by the financial crisis, according to the annual wealth report from Capgemini and Merrill Lynch.

It was perhaps inevitable that after experiencing such rapid wealth growth in the past few years, Asia’s high-net-worth individuals suffered particularly keenly from the recent crisis. But there is still huge market potential in the region for those wealth advisory firms able to tap it. Download: Asia-Pacific_Wealth_Report_2009_CapG_ML

The wealth of the region’s high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) — those with $1 million or more in investable assets — fell by 22.3% to $7.4 trillion last year, below the level in 2006. That compares to a fall of 19.5% for global HNWI wealth, according to the 2009 Asia-Pacific Wealth Report, released yesterday by consulting firm Capgemini and Merrill Lynch.

Hong Kong HNWIs saw by far the biggest drop, losing 65.4% of their wealth, followed by those in Australia (29.7%), Singapore (29.4%) and India (29.0%). South Koreans got off lightest with a 13.4% decline in asset value, while Japan saw a fall of 16.7%.

In terms of market capitalisation, the Asia-Pacific region as a whole saw an average fall of 48.6% last year, with China (60.3%) and India (64.1%) suffering the biggest declines of the countries surveyed*.

With regard to asset allocation, the report noted three key trends. First, Asian HNWIs undertook a ‘flight to safety’ to cash-like assets with their allocation to cash-based investments rising to 29% in 2008 from 25% the year before. This reflected an increase in the global allocation to cash in 2008 to 21% from 17% in 2007. Taiwan had the highest allocation to cash/deposits at 41% of its total portfolio, while India had by far the least with 13%.

Another trend was an opportunistic shift back to real estate investment with an allocation of 22% in 2008, up from 20% the year before. Regionally, Australia had the highest allocation to real estate (41%), closely followed by South Korea (38%), while Taiwan had the least (15%).

As for other asset classes, India had the largest allocation to equities (32%), despite the heavy fall in the country’s stock market last year, while South Korea had the smallest (13%). And, perhaps surprisingly, Indonesia had the largest allocation to alternative investments (9%), covering structured products, hedge funds, derivatives, foreign currency, commodities, private equity and venture capital.

The third broad trend noted by the report was a retreat to home-region and domestic investments with HNWIs increasing their domestic investments to 67% in 2008 from 53% the year before. China was the top Asian market for investment by HNWIs in Asia-Pacific ex-Japan, while their peers in Japan preferred to invest domestically.

Allocations to mature markets are likely to increase through 2010 as Asia-Pacific HNWIs seek more stable returns. Allocations to North America, for example, are predicted to rise from 17% last year to 20% in 2010.

In terms of diversity of geographic distribution of investments, Japanese HNWIs were the most diversified beyond Asia in 2008 with 45% of their allocation outside the Asia-Pacific region. The least diversified were the Chinese with a 17% allocation outside Asia-Pacific, and India with a mere 14% invested outside the region.

On a wider level, the crisis resulted in many Asian clients shifting their assets towards regional and local firms, changing the competitive landscape. Such moves exposed “weaknesses in the capabilities of the region’s wealth management firms and especially revealed the disparate strengths and weaknesses of international firms versus regional and local competitors”, says the report.

In terms of the challenges faced by wealth management firms in Asia, they feel maintaining client trust/client retention is by far the biggest concern, according to a Capgemini survey carried out during July and August. Eighty-five percent of wealth management advisers cited this as the biggest challenge they face as a result of the crisis, and 45% cited as the next major issue the need to have the right skill set and talent to cater to HNWI clients.

A closer look at the issue of client attrition shows that 42% of wealth advisers lost clients last year; 63% of those advisers employed an individual-adviser model, while 37% used a team-based model. Meanwhile, younger advisers tended to lose more clients than older ones with 62% of those who lost clients being 40 or under. “Advisers were not mature enough to handle the intense market conditions,” says the report.

Experience is clearly key, and advisers in the Asia-Pacific region were less well able to handle the economic turmoil. The average amount of experience for the region was 9.7 years, versus the global average of 13.3 years. Wealth management firms need to remedy this situation if they are to make the most of the untapped market potential in China, India and elsewhere in the region.

* The report focuses on 11 markets: Australia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. Together, these account for 95.3% of Asia-Pacific gross domestic product.

Source: Asian Investor, 14.10.2009

Filed under: Asia, Australia, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Library, News, Services, Singapore, Thailand, Wealth Management , Japan, Asia, China 中国, India, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Taiwan, Korea, Australia, Hedge Fund, Asia Strategy, Risk Management, Market Analysis, Wealth Management, HNWI High Net Worth Individuals, Real Estate

June 12, 2009 • 12:15 am 0

Asia calls for own Rating Agency

Asia needs to establish an Asian-owned and managed rating agency as years of Western domination of finance has created an inherent systemic bias impeding the progress of Asian banks.

CIMB group chief executive Datuk Seri Nazir Razak said this was necessary, especially since Asia was the main supplier of investment funds.

“It seems that even when Asians look at one another, we tend to use Western spectacles. The clearest evidence is our reliance on global credit rating agencies,” he said in his keynote address at the Third Euromoney Thailand Investment Forum in Bangkok, Thailand, yesterday.

Nazir said he could not understand the basis of China, the world’s biggest lender, being accredited “A1″ by Moody’s compared with “AAA” for the UK and “AA2″ for Italy.

“Fitch is no different: China at ‘A+’, UK at ‘AAA’ and Italy ‘AA-’. The story is not too different for bank ratings: Asia’s lowly leveraged banks versus US and European banks with ‘intoxicated’ balance sheets.”.

Nazir said ratings affected how banks allocated capital and influenced the level of transactions conducted between banks, adding that sovereign ratings also defined the ceiling for national bank and corporate ratings, amplifying ramifications of the problem.

“As if that isn’t enough, the introduction of Basel II would compound the problem as loans would also be subjected to ratings, trapping the entire credit system in this biased web.”

He also said that the current crisis, which started in the US, provided a unique window of opportunity for Asian banks to decisively alter the share of global banking in their favour.

“Once Asians have a greater share of global finance, I think that we will also see a more balanced and equitable world where Western perspectives give way to global perspectives, where a new financial architecture is designed without prejudices and where intra-Asian trade and investment flows grow exponentially.”

Source: Intellasia.net, Busines Times Malaysia 11.06.2009

Filed under: Asia, China, Data Vendor, India, Malaysia, News, Risk Management, Thailand , Asia, CIMB, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak, Fitch Rating, Malaysia, Moody's Rating, Rating, Risk Management

June 10, 2009 • 1:02 am 2

Surprising Green Energy Investment Trends Found Worldwide

Science Daily 07.06.2009 - Some $155 billion was invested in 2008 in clean energy companies and projects worldwide, not including large hydro, a new report says. Of this $13.5 billion of new private investment went into companies developing and scaling-up new technologies alongside $117 billion of investment in renewable energy projects from geothermal and wind to solar and biofuels.

The 2008 investment is more than a four-fold increase since 2004 according to Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009, prepared for the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Sustainable Energy Finance Initiative by global information provider New Energy Finance.

Extremely difficult financial market conditions prevailed during 2008 as a result of the global economic crisis. Nevertheless investment in clean energy topped 2007′s record investments by 5% in large part as a result of China, Brazil and other emerging economies.

Of the $155 billion, $105 billion was spent directly developing 40 GW of power generating capacity from wind, solar, small-hydro, biomass and geothermal sources. A further $35 billion was spent on developing 25 GW of large hydropower, according to the report.

This $140 billion investment in 65 GW of low carbon electricity generation compares with the estimated $250 billion spent globally in 2008 constructing 157GW of new power generating capacity from all sources. It means that renewables currently account for the majority of investment and over 40% of actual power generation capacity additions last year.

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director, said: “Without doubt the economic crisis has taken its toll on investments in clean energy when set against the record-breaking growth of recent years. Investment in the United States fell by two per cent and in Europe growth was very much muted. However, there were also some bright points in 2008 especially in developing economies—China became the world’s second largest wind market in terms of new capacity and the world’s biggest photovoltaic manufacturer and a rise in geothermal energy may be getting underway in countries from Australia to Japan and Kenya”.

“Meanwhile other developing economies such as Brazil, Chile, Peru and the Philippines have brought in, or are poised to introduce policies and laws fostering clean energy as part of a Green Economy. Mexico for example, the Global host of World Environment Day on 5 June, is expected to double its target for energy from renewables to 16 per cent as part of a new national energy policy,” he added.

Overall Highlights from the Report

Wind attracted the highest new investment ($51.8 billion, 1% growth on 2007), although solar made the largest gains ($33.5 billion, 49% growth) while biofuels dropped somewhat ($16.9 billion, 9% decrease).

Total transaction value in the sustainable energy sector during 2008 – including corporate acquisitions, asset re-financings and private equity buy-outs – was $223 billion, an increase of 7% over 2007. But capital raised via the public stock markets fell 51% to $11.4 billion as clean energy share prices lost 61% of their value during 2008.

Investment in the second half of 2008 was down 17% on the first half, and down 23% on the final six months of 2007, a trend that has continued into 2009.

One response to the global economic crisis has been announcements of stimulus packages with specific, multi-billion dollar provisions for energy efficiency up to boosts to renewable energies.

“These ‘green new deals’ lined up by some economies, including China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, European countries and the United States contain some serious clean energy provisions. These will help support the market,” said Mr. Steiner.

“However, the biggest renewables stimulus package of them all can come at the UN climate convention meeting in Copenhagen in just over 180 days time. This is where governments need to Seal the Deal on a new climate agreement-one that can bring certainty to the carbon markets, one that can unleash transformative investments in lean and clean green tech,” he added.

Green Energy Costs Coming Down — Solar Costs Set to Fall 43%

The investment surge of recent years and softened commodity markets have started to ease supply chain bottlenecks, especially in the wind and solar sectors, which will cause prices to fall towards marginal costs and several players to consolidate. The price of solar PV modules, for example, is predicted to fall by over 43% in 2009.

Carbon Markets Continue Upward

Despite the turmoil in the world’s financial markets, transaction value in the global carbon market grew 87% during 2008, reaching a total of $120 billion. Following the lead of the EU and Kyoto compliance markets, several countries are now putting in place a system of interlinked carbon markets and working towards a global scheme under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Growth Shifts to the Developing World

On a regional basis, investment in Europe in 2008 was $49.7 billion, a rise of 2%, and in North America was $30.1 billion, a fall of 8%.

These regions experienced a slow-down in the financing of new renewable energy projects due to the lack of project finance and the fact that tax credit-driven markets are mostly ineffective in a downturn. With developed country market growth stalled (down 1.7%), developing countries surged forward 27% over 2007 to $36.6 billion, accounting for nearly one third of global investments.

China led new investment in Asia, with an 18% increase over 2007 to $15.6 billion, mostly in new wind projects, and some biomass plants. Investment in India grew 12% to $4.1 billion in 2008. Brazil accounted for almost all renewable energy investment in Latin America in 2008, with ethanol receiving $10.8 billion, up 76% from 2007. Africa achieved a modest increase by comparison, with investments up 10% to approximately $1.1 billion.

The Greening of Economic Stimulus Packages

Not surprisingly given market conditions, private sector investment was stalling in late 2008 but government investment looks ready to take up some of the slack in 2009. Sustainable energy investments are a core part of key government fiscal stimulus packages announced in recent months, accounting for an estimated $183 billion of commitments to date.

Countries vary significantly in terms of investment and the clarity of their measures. The US and China remain the leaders, each devoting roughly $67 billion, but South Korea’s package is the “greenest” with 20% devoted to clean energy. This green stimuli illustrates the political will of an increasing number of governments for securing future growth through greener economic development.

According to Michael Liebreich, Chairman & CEO of New Energy Finance, “There is a strong case for further measures, such as requiring state-supported banks to raise lending to the sector, providing capital gains tax exemptions on investments in clean technology, creating a framework for Green Bonds and so on, all targeted at getting investment flowing”.

“What’s most important is that stimulus funds start flowing immediately, not in a year or so. Many of the policies to achieve growth over the medium term are already in place, including feed-in tariff regimes, mandatory renewable energy targets and tax incentives. There is too much emphasis amongst some policy-makers on support mechanisms, and not enough on the urgent needs of investors right now.”

Between 2009 and 2011 UNEP estimates that a minimum of $750 billion – or 37% of current economic stimulus packages and 1% of global GDP – is needed to finance a sustainable economic recovery by investing in the greening of five key sectors of the global economy: buildings, energy, transport, agriculture and water.

2009 and beyond: Climate change, energy security and green jobs

New investments in the first quarter of 2009 fell by 53% to $13.3 billion compared to the same period in 2008, reflecting the depth of the global financial crisis, according to the report, which notes “‘green-shoots’ of recovery during the second quarter of 2009, but the sector has a long way to go this year to reach the investment levels of late 2007 and early 2008.”

Climate change, economic recovery and energy security will spur far greater investments in coming years.

In particular, the growing understanding that global carbon emissions (CO2) must peakaround 2015 to avoid dangerous climate change (based on the 4th assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change– UNEP/World Meteorological Organisation) will make clean energy investments national priorities.

Annual investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage need to reach half a trillion dollars by 2020, representing an average investment of 0.44% of GDP.

These levels of investment are not impossible to achieve, especially in view of the recent four year growth from $35 billion to $155 billion. However, reaching them will require a further scale-up of societal commitments to a more sustainable, low-carbon energy paradigm.

With the current stimulus packages now in play and a hoped-for Copenhagen climate deal in December, the opportunity to meet this challenge is greater than ever, even seen from the depths of an economic downturn.

Says Michael Ahearn, President of US-based First Solar: “This report highlights the continuing importance of government leadership to ensure that renewable energies, including solar, achieve their potential in weaning us off fossil fuels and addressing climate change.”

Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009 — Sector Hi-lites

Wind

Wind attracted the highest new investment ($51.8 billion, 1% growth on 2007), confirming its status as the most mature and best-established sustainable generation technology. Wind’s leading position continues to be driven by asset finance, as new generation capacity is added worldwide, particularly in China and the US.

Solar

Solar continues to be the fastest-growing sector for new investment ($33.5 billion, 49% growth on 2007), with compound annual growth of 70% between 2006 and 2008. Solar’s growth reflects the easing of the silicon bottleneck and falling costs, which are expected to decline 43% in 2009. Solar project financing underwent the most dramatic growth in 2008, rising 71% to $22.1 billion.

Biofuels

Investment in biofuels fell 9% in 2008 down to $16.9 billion. Although the technology is well established, particularly in Brazil, it has suffered for the past two years from over-investment in early 2007, followed by a fall from grace caused by a combination of high wheat prices, lower oil prices and an increasingly heated food-versus-fuel controversy. Biofuels technology investment is now focused on finding second-generation / non-food biofuels (such as algae, crop technologies and jatropha): the second half of 2008 saw next-generation technology investment exceed first-generation for the first time.

Geothermal

Geothermal was the highest growth sector for investment in 2008, with investment up 149% and 1.3 GW of new capacity installed. The competitive cost of electricity from geothermal sources and long output lifetimes have made this an attractive investment despite the high initial capital cost.

Energy Efficiency

New private investment in energy efficiency was $1.8 billion – a fall of 33% on 2007 – although this figure doesn’t capture the investments made by corporates, governments and public financing institutions.

The energy efficiency sector recorded the second highest levels of venture capital and private equity investment (after solar), which will help companies develop the next generation of sustainable energy technologies for areas such as the smart grid. Energy efficiency also attracted more than 33% of the estimated $180 billion in green stimulus measures.

Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009 — Regional Hi-lites

Europe

Europe continues to dominate sustainable energy new investment with $49.7 billion in 2008, an increase of 2% on 2007 (37% CAGR from 2006-2008).This investment is underpinned by government policies supporting new sustainable energy projects, particularly in countries such as Spain, which saw $17.4 billion of asset finance investment in 2008.

North America

New investment in sustainable energy in North America was $30.1 billion in 2008, a fall of 8% compared to 2007 (15% CAGR from 2006-2008). The US saw a slow-down in asset financing following the glut of investment in corn based ethanol in 2007. Also, the number of tax equity providers fell for wind and solar projects due to the financial crisis.

Africa

South Africa — Feed-in Tariffs Kick Start Green Investment

On 31 March 2009, South Africa announced ‘feed-in’ tariffs that guarantee a stable rate-of-return for renewable energy projects. South Africa is hoping to spur the sort of investment spurred in Germany and Denmark through feed-in tariff schemes.

Sub-Saharan Africa — Geothermal Kenya & Sweet Sorghum Ethanol

Elsewhere in Sub-Saharan Africa, lack of finance is the principal barrier to sustainable energy roll-out. However, some notable progress was made in 2008.

In Kenya, a number of investments are underway; including the continents first privately financed geothermal plant and a 300MW wind farm planned for construction near Lake Turkana.

In Ethiopia, French wind turbine manufacturer Vergnet signed a EUR 210 million supply contract in October 2008 with the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation for the supply and installation of 120 one MW turbines.

In Angola, Brazilian industrial conglomerate Odebrecht set up an Angolan sugar cane processing plant and plans to steer its production from ethanol to sugar when it comes online late next year. UK-based Cams Group announced plans for a 240 million liter per year sweet sorghum ethanol facility in Tanzania.

North Africa — Sun and Wind

Renewable energy in North Africa remains focused on Morroco, Tunisia and Egypt, particularly in solar and wind. Egypt recently announced its expectation that wind farms in the Saidi area will produce 20% of the country’s energy needs by 2020. Morocco’s government has also outlined plans to meet 10% of its power needs with renewable energy sources.

Asia

China – Asia’s Green Energy Giant

By 2008, China was the world’s second largest wind market by newly installed capacity and the fourth largest by overall installed capacity. Between 5GW and 6.5GW of new capacity was installed and commissioned in 2008, bringing total capacity to 11GW to 12.5GW.

China became the world’s largest PV manufacturer in 2008, with 95% of its production for the export market.

Some 800MW of biomass power was added in 2008, bringing the total installed capacity for agriculture waste-fired power plants up to 2.88GW. Development of biofuels has all but ground to a halt, mostly due to high feedstock costs.

India – Pressing Need for Grid Improvements and Clean Power Generation

In 2008 the largest portion of new investment in India went to the wind sector, growing 17% — from $2.2 billion to $2.6. Thanks to a supportive policy environment, solar investment grew from $18 million in 2007 to $347 million in 2008, most of which went to setting up module and cell manufacturing facilities.

Small hydro investment in India grew nearly fourfold to $543 million in 2008, while biofuels investment stalled and fell from $251 million in 2007 to only $49 million in 2008.

Japan – A New Push for Sustainable Energy

In December 2008, Japan unveiled a new $9 billion subsidy package for solar roofs, granting JPY 70,000 ($785)/kW for rooftop PV installation. For the first time in three years, domestic shipments of solar cells rose between April to September (up 6%), indicating a fundamental change in domestic solar demand.

Geothermal also seems to be reawakening in Japan, after a twenty-year lull. In January 2009, plans for a 60MW geothermal plant were announced.

Australia – Geothermal and Wind Gaining Support

The Australian government has set up a A$500m ($436 million) Renewable Energy Fund to accelerate the roll-out of sustainable energy in the country. A$50 million has already been committed to helping geothermal developers meet the high up-front costs of exploration and drilling.

Geothermal is expected to provide about 7% of the country’s baseload power by 2030.

Wind will also benefit from Australia’s new push for sustainable energy, and is expected to provide most of the 20% renewable energy by 2020 target.

Other Asian Countries — Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia

In late 2008, the Philippine government signed a new Renewable Energy Law, offering specific incentives (mainly tax breaks) for renewable generation — a first for Southeast Asia and perhaps a model for other countries. Thailand and Malaysia have been talking about introducing renewable energy legislation for some time; and other countries are planning biofuel blending mandates, similar to those introduced by the Philippines in 2007 and subsequently by Thailand.

Latin America

Brazil – World’s Largest Renewable Energy Market

About 46% of Brazil’s energy comes from renewable sources, and 85% of its power generation capacity thanks to its enormous hydropower resources and long-established bioethanol industry.

Some 90% of Brazil’s new cars run on both ethanol and petrol (all of which is blended with around 25% ethanol). By the end of 2008, ethanol accounted for more than 52% of fuel consumption by light vehicles.

Brazil is now moving into wind. The government has announced a wind-specific auction to take place in mid-2009, for the sale of approximately 1GW of wind energy per year.

Brazil also has a global leader in renewable energy financing. In 2008 the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) was the largest provider globally of project finance to renewable energy projects.

Chile, Peru, Mexico and the rest of Latin America

Brazil accounted for more than 90% of new investment in Latin American, but several other countries are looking to implement regulatory frameworks supportive of renewable energy.

Chile’s recently approved Renewable Energy Legislation is responsible for regulating the country’s renewable energy sector, where small hydro, wind and geothermal projects have become increasingly attractive for investors. It requires electricity generators of more than 200MW to source 10% of their energy mix from renewables.

In 2008 Peru introduced legislation that requires 5% of electricity produced in the country to be derived from renewable sources over the next five years, including financial incentives such as preferential feed-in-tariffs and 20-year PPAs for project developers.

Mexico has a non-mandatory target to source 8% of its energy consumption from renewable sources by 2012. However a new national energy plan expected at the end of June 2009 is expected to double that target.

For original article click here.

Source: ScienceDaily 07.06.2009

Filed under: Asia, Australia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Energy & Environment, India, Japan, Latin America, Library, Malaysia, Mexico, News, Peru, Risk Management, Thailand , Africa, Alternative Energy Markets, Asia, Brazil, Carbon Credits, Carbon Market, China 中国, Clean Technology, Climate, Credit Crisis, Energy, Environment, Europe, India, Latin America, Mercado de Carbon, Mexico

May 13, 2009 • 12:45 am 0

Emerging Markets in the global crisis and beyond- May 2009- DeutscheBank

download: Emerging Markets in the global crisis and beyond – May 2009-DB

Source: DB 05.05.2009

Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Banking, Brazil, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Energy & Environment, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Latin America, Library, Malaysia, Mexico, Risk Management, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam , Latin America, Asia, Brazil, China 中国, India, Singapore, BMV Bolsa Mexicana de Valores, Mexico, Commodities, Malaysia, Korea, Indonesia, Argentina, Colombia, Financial Crisis, BM&FBOVESPA, Emerging Markets, Economic Crisis, Russia

May 8, 2009 • 12:37 am 0

How to develop Carbon Credits and make money

South Pole is a carbon asset manager that helps companies develop projects that create credits to trade on carbon trading markets. We talk to Renat Heuberger, a managing partner at South Pole, about the industry.

How aware are Asian companies about the carbon trading market?
The world of carbon is dividing into two parts — those with Kyoto targets and those without Kyoto targets. The countries that have Kyoto protocol targets at the moment are mainly OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, and in Asia (ex-Australia), Japan is the only country that has such targets. As a result, only Japan has so far been acting as a buyer.

In other Asian countries, however, there are many companies that are active on the selling side of the carbon trading market. These include Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and of course China and India. The way they participate is by, for example, introducing CO2 reduction measures for their companies, whereby the resulting certificates are then sold. So the level of participation in carbon trading really depends on what country you come from. So Asia is aware of the market. Read orignal article by FinanceAsia.com

You help companies that are investing in projects that potentially qualify for emission reduction credits. How does that work?
South Pole is a carbon development and carbon trading company. We have offices staffed with technology experts all around the world. When we’re talking about selling to the carbon market (so I’m talking now about the countries outside of Japan) what these experts do is approach companies and identify what they could do to reduce emissions. Of course, we have a lot of experience in what works and what doesn’t. This is very important, because you need to take measures that reduce at least 50,000 tonnes of CO2 per year to make it worthwhile. If it’s lower than that, it gets tricky, it’s not really worth the effort so much to participate in carbon trading. So we are quite aware of what industries work for carbon trading and we approach companies in those industries and propose emission reduction measures.

We also have technology partners, for instance providers of bio-gas engines, generation equipment or boilers — technology that is directly or indirectly used for reducing emissions — and we introduce these technology providers to the companies.

So basically we come through the door and say: ‘Ok guys, we see an opportunity for emission reductions, and guess what, we have a solution. We can help you reduce the emissions and you can even make money from it.’

How long does this whole process take?
There are two parallel steps. The first part, which is to get the technology in place and start reducing the emissions, can take from six months up to several years. How long this takes is often linked to the question of how fast you can get your financing act together. In parallel, the process to register the project (so it is accepted as a clean development mechanism, or CDM, project) normally takes another year.

Just to be clear to our readers. Under the Kyoto Protocol, developed countries with quantitative emission limits can invest in carbon projects in developing countries to assist their sustainable development. Those projects are known as CDM projects. And those CDM projects produce tradable carbon credits called certified emission reductions or CERs. But there are also voluntary emission credits, or VERs, which are also called carbon offsets. In this case, a purchaser — typically a commercial firm — buys an emissions allowance to offset the carbon produced. This happens mainly for reputational purposes, and to contribute voluntarily in the fight against climate change. There is no formal market for VERs.

So, my question for you is, do you normally do projects that are CDMs, that will produce certified CERs? You don’t usually do VERs, do you?
We do both. Our focus is obviously on CERs because the market is much bigger, but the voluntary market is growing. The good thing is it doesn’t stop in 2012. On the voluntary market you can transact emission reductions for as long as you want. While on the compliance market, things may change once the political circumstances change.

We are the only carbon credit development company in the world which has an office in Taiwan. Taiwan doesn’t qualify for CDMs because its legal status with the United Nations is not clear due to its dispute with China and it is not under the Kyoto Protocol. So we are generating VERs in Taiwan, which is quite an interesting model as well.

Do you tell a company “I think you should produce CERs” or do they usually tell you what they would prefer to do?
It depends. There are certain industries, for instance the starch or the ethanol industry in Thailand, which are already aware that they can produce CERs by covering their waste-water lagoons and producing bio-gas. The starch industry is quite busy in Thailand and these companies are more or less aware of carbon trading and basically it comes down to what company they are comfortable doing business with to produce their CERs.

For other industries, it’s all quite new. There are sectors, such as the transport industry, or producers of energy efficient appliances, which only recently became aware that there is this possibility. So in these cases, it’s typically us going to them and saying: “You have this potential, why don’t you do this…?”

Ok, so once a project has CDM status and you’ve produced CERs, how are they then traded?
For CDMs, it’s like trading crude oil. The volume may be a bit smaller, but it’s the same mechanics. It mostly happens in Europe, because most of the buyers are in Europe. But every day you can check the current spot price. And so you develop your project, and you sell it at a good moment — when you believe the price is not going to move against you. It’s very classic trading techniques.

The difference is that when you trade crude oil, someone actually has the product. You have the one gallon of oil. With carbon trading, you don’t have a product. You just have a couple of bytes on a server at the United Nations. It’s an abstract commodity, if you will. But it can be traded.

Aside from it being abstract, the market is also slightly different because it is exposed to political decisions. If the political winds move in a way that makes them say, no one wants these products anymore, obviously the price will fall. But if the political winds blow in another way, and politicians say we’ve not done enough to prevent global warming and we need to reduce emissions even more, the pricing will go up. So my point is, this market is not only driven by fundamentals but also by political decisions, and that makes it unique from other commodity markets. That’s the CER market.

I think, however, it’s also important to note once again the difference between CERs and VERs because the VERs don’t have this 2012 deadline, which is when the Kyoto Protocol expires. They can sell indefinitely. The voluntary market is like selling any product. For this, you go out and talk to banks and airlines, anyone who can be interested in voluntarily offsetting and making a contribution to prevent global warming and promote sustainable development in the developing world.

So the CER market has this political element, which makes it different, while the VER market doesn’t have such a political element, but much more of a reputational element.

In December, world leaders are coming together in Copenhagen to try to reach a decision on how to, if at all, continue the Kyoto Protocol. Do you think there will be an agreement in Copenhagen in December?
In 2012, the Kyoto Protocol expires. Unfortunately, the world has yet to agree what will happen after that. This is unfortunate right now, because, as I mentioned, it takes about two years to take a project to market, and we’ve only got three years left to go with the Kyoto Protocol. So now, if you were to start a project, you’re only talking about one, maybe two, years of trading under Kyoto — but a typical CDM project could generate up to 21 years worth of credits. One or two years versus 21 years is obviously a big difference. So of course we hope that a resolution is reached in December in Copenhagen that calls for countries to extend their commitment beyond 2012.

At the moment we are hopeful that this will happen because of the new administration in the US. What challenges the whole thing is the financial crisis, which is changing the focus for politicians. Their priority is fighting the financial crisis rather than focusing on the Kyoto Protocol. So the climate issue goes on the back burner. But there are positive signs from the US and Europe. European leaders, for example, have said that if other countries participate they would aim for 30% less emissions by 2020.

Now, what would happen if it doesn’t go through? The reality is this market won’t collapse. The good news is it would not go away just because there is no agreement. What would happen is there would be regional markets. For example, in Australia, the new government has embarked on an emissions trading scheme that is likely to launch in 2010 or 2011. Once it’s online, it will include commitments that go way beyond 2012.

The Europeans have also committed that even if there is no agreement they would continue carbon trading. Of course, the big unknown is the price. No one knows what the price would be in those schemes.

The good thing about the Kyoto market is that there’s one set of rules that applies to everybody. But if nothing is passed in Copenhagen, what could emerge is that we have a series of domestic schemes — one plan in Australia, another in Europe, another in Canada — with everyone having different rules. And that complicates matters. So once you start developing projects you would have to do it according to the rules of the country in which you were going to sell the credits. This would be more complicated, but it could work.

What type of products does South Pole specialise in?
We specialise in renewable energy and energy efficiency. And we of course specialise in the highest quality products — Gold Standard credits — you could say that we dominate that market, as we think it adds far more value. What qualifies as Gold Standard? Mainly energy efficiency and renewable energy. So we have a lot of wind power, hydropower, thermal-power, solar power, bio-gas — these types of projects. There’s a lot of potential in Asia. For example, countries like Thailand and Malaysia have a lot of potential for bio-gas power. And wherever there are mountains — there is potential for hydropower, so Vietnam, Indonesia and China are good countries. So there’s room to grow.

Tell us a little more about the Gold Standard carbon credit that South Pole created.
The point of these projects is to reduce emissions as the main aim is to protect the planet against global warming. But, you get there in different ways. You may have a project where you have a landfill site and you burn the landfill gas. That is good for reducing emissions, but that’s it. There’s no other benefit in doing this. The “only” benefit is to prevent climate change.

Now, there is a group of NGOs, such as WWF and the like, who said: ‘If we do this carbon trading mechanism, we should actually distinguish between the projects that only reduce climate gases and those that reduce climate gases and provide additional benefit to their host country.” We agreed, and contributed to make the Gold Standard happen.

The Gold Standard is given to projects that reduce carbon gases but also have social benefits. Some examples would be employment generation, or other positive impacts on air pollution, or a project that also reduces water pollution, and so on. The focus of the Gold Standard is projects that have a community element — so the money doesn’t just go to the industry but to the community as well. A very good example is rural electrification, which brings clean energy to people in the countryside.

What do you say to people when they are sceptical about CO2 emissions, arguing that it’s not necessary, or whatever their criticism may be? Do you hear criticisms? Or by the time they come to you, are they already convinced that they need to do something?
Well there are two types of critics. Both of them are clearly wrong, I would say. The first type of critic is still sceptical about climate change and the question of whether the problem is man-made. If you’ve got hundreds of scientists agreeing to the fact that the fast worsening of climate change is man-made, it’s amazing there are still people questioning this. There’s just an overwhelming amount of evidence, and it’s just very, very hard to find convincing evidence to the contrary. But there will always be people who will say crazy things.

But even if there wasn’t the issue of climate change, it still makes sense to reduce CO2 emissions, because when you do that you typically save fuel. And the fuel we use — such as crude oil — is going to run out at some point. So there’s anyway value to reducing our use of it.

The second set of critics say that carbon trading is not a good thing — they argue it’s not sound. This is clearly wrong too. Because nations have set up a very extensive set of compliance rules — that’s why it takes more than one year to complete a project — and the process is extremely conservative, in the way we prove and calculate and certify it by an independent entity.

Plus there are lots of economic arguments for carbon trading. Money incentivises people to reduce emissions. If a European company finds it difficult to reduce their emissions any further, it makes sense that they finance a measure in Asia where it can be less expensive to reduce emissions. That’s what climate trading is all about. It leads to a good allocation of resources so that we can protect the planet in the most efficient manner.

Finally, another important point for Asia (and also the rest of the world) is that most of the Asian companies, who participate in carbon trading, actually end up making money doing it (and I’m not talking about trading here, I’m talking about the process). Because what is an emission? It’s waste, it’s inefficiency. And it does intuitively make sense to reduce your inefficiencies.

Source:FinanceAsia, 07.05.2009, by Lara Wozniak

Filed under: Asia, Australia, China, Energy & Environment, Library, Malaysia, News, Risk Management, Thailand, Vietnam , Alternative Energy Markets, Asia, Carbon Credits, Carbon Footprint, Carbon Market, CDM Clean Development Mechanism, CER Certified Emissions Reduction, Clean Technology, Energy, Environment, Mercado de Carbon, Risk Management

May 4, 2009 • 11:57 pm 1

Emerging Asia inflation tumbles, more rate cuts seen

Inflation rates slowed once again in emerging Asia, pointing to a fresh round of interest rate cuts in Thailand and Indonesia as the region battles to reinforce tentative signs that economies may be on the path to recovery. Indonesia said annual inflation stood at 7.3 percent in April, its lowest level since December 2007, while South Korea also reported a fall in April inflation to a 14-month low of 3.6 percent. However, Thailand saw a fourth straight month of falling prices or deflation with April consumer prices falling 0.9 percent from a year earlier.

Core consumer prices in Japan fell 0.1 percent in March from a year earlier, heralding what the Bank of Japan expects to be two-years of deflation although the central bank has dismissed the idea of an economically damaging spiral of falling prices.

Prices are tumbling across the world as buyers tighten their belts in the face of the global recession and because of the collapse in commodities prices from record high levels last year. Crude oil for example, has dropped to around $50 a barrel from its near $150 record set in July.

Central banks globally have slashed rates in the hope that cheaper credit will spark a revival in their economies. Government have spent hugely on fiscal stimulus package and some data suggests the worst of the crisis may be over.

In Asia, exports have collapsed as recession in major demand centres such as the United States and Europe hammered demand. But signs that the recession is easing has raised hopes that Asia’s export engine may see a return of some demand, albeit from low levels.

Indeed, major exporters South Korea and Japan have both seen a pick up in monthly exports even if they are still much lower than year-earlier levels. Annual falls in exports elsewhere have become less severe.

SOME WILL CUT, SOME WILL NOT

In Thailand, the fall in prices is seen as largely technical and reflective of the sharp falls in the past year in commodities prices rather than the result of falling demand.

The latter is feared by policy makers because it can add an extra weight on growth or push an economy deeper into recession.

“With very, very little risk of inflationary pressures, and with monetary conditions still fairly tight, there remains a scope to cut rates to support growth,” said Carl Rajoo, an economist at Forecast in Singapore said of the Bank of Thailand.

“The central bank is likely to make a measured cut in May, and then wait and see before additional loosening is started,” he said.

The Bank of Thailand is due to review policy next on May 20, when analysts expect a 25 basis-point cut in the policy rate to 1.00 percent, the lowest level since the central bank started targeting inflation in 2000.

The Bank of Thailand has already cut its policy rate by 250 basis points since December to support an economy widely seen as in recession and pressured not only by the global downturn but by political unrest.

In Indonesia, an easing in food price pressures and a 14 percent rise in the rupiah against the dollar since early March, making imports more expensive, has weighed on prices.

Inflation has come down steadily from above 12 percent just seven months ago giving the central bank room to keep cutting interest rates to support Southeast Asia’s largest economy, whose exports are falling at close to 30 percent.

“We expect Bank Indonesia to cut rates by 25 basis points in May and (in) June,” said Helmi Arman, an economist at Bank Danamon in Jakarta. The central bank next meets on Tuesday.

However, South Korea’s central bank is seen holding fire for now.

It has skipped rate cuts at its last two meetings and is expected by financial markets to leave rates unchanged at a record low of 2.0 percent at its next meeting on May 12.

Inflation has fallen steadily, but growing optimism the economy may be starting to turnaround suggests the central bank will save its monetary ammunition for now. Since the financial crisis blew up last year, it has cut rates by an unprecedented 325 basis points.

South Korea’s inflation rate fell to 3.6 percent in April, its lowest level in 14 months but with some signs in the trade-reliant country that exports are picking up, the central bank is unlikely to use inflation as a cue to cut rates again.

The Philippines is expected to report on Tuesday that its consumer prices inflation fell to a 16-month low of 4.7 percent in April, also paving the way for the central bank to cut its overnight borrowing rate, already a 17-year low of 4.5 percent, at its next meeting on May 28.

Source: Reuters, 04.05.2009

Filed under: Asia, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, News, Thailand, Vietnam , Asia, Economic Crisis, Exportacion a Asia, Financial Crisis, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Philippines, Thailand

April 28, 2009 • 11:56 pm 0

Asian electronic trading revenues to decline – TABB

Electronic trading revenues are anticipated to fall in the Asia-Pacific region, while the development of dark pools is expected to stall, according to new research from consultancy TABB Group.

In ‘Asian Equity Trading 2009’, TABB predicts that income from electronic trading will slip 16.9% to $815 million this year, from $981 million in 2008. This follows a similar decrease of 17.7% in institutional value traded in the previous 12 months, a drop that affected overall trading strategies in Asia, according to TABB.

“In the second half of 2008, there was a significant pullback leading into the first quarter of 2009,” said Matt Simon, TABB Group analyst and author of the report. “Traders saw liquidity sink.”

The study, which examines institutional trading across Japan, Hong Kong, Korea, Australia, Singapore and Taiwan, estimated that dark pool uptake in Asia-Pacific would take longer to develop than in the US and Europe. TABB predicted that by 2010 3.5% of value traded would be matched off-exchange in Japan and 1.5% in the five other market centres examined. Volatile market conditions have also marked a return to VWAP/TWAP algorithmic trading strategies from buy-side traders in the region, the report added.

Despite the decline in electronic trading revenues, global expansion in the region is expected to continue, driving connectivity to new markets such as Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia.

Source: The New Trader, 23.04.2009

Filed under: Asia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, News, Singapore, Thailand, Trading Technology , Japan, Trade Connectivity, Mercado Electronico, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Taiwan, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Algo Trading, Dark Pools

April 24, 2009 • 3:01 am 0

Asian equity electronic trading revenues to sink in 2009 – Tabb

Equity electronic trading revenues in Asia Pacific are set to see a 17% fall this year, with liquidity sinking during the downturn, according to research from Tabb Group.

Tabb predicts revenues will drop to $815 million, down 16.9% from $981 million in 2008. This follows a 17.7% decrease in institutional value traded from 2007 to 2008, a year-over-year drop that has affected overall trading strategies across Asia.

Tabb says the global downturn hit just as electronic trading was taking hold in the region, forcing many hedge funds to curtail electronic strategies or simply shutter operations.

Matt Simon, Tabb analyst and report author, says: “In the second half of 2008 there was a significant pullback leading into the first quarter of 2009. Traders saw liquidity sink.”

The research also highlights the slow rate of dark pool trading adoption in the region. Dark pools are estimated to account for at least 10% of all equity trading in the US whilst the introduction of MiFID has spurred their growth in Europe.

They are far less popular in Asia although last month Goldman Sachs launched its Sigma-X dark pool equity trading system in Hong Kong, while CLSA, Instinet and Investment Technology Group also run platforms in the region.

Yet Tabb estimates that only 3.5% of value traded will be matched off-exchange in Japan by 2010, up from 1.2% in 2008. In Hong Kong, Korea, Australia, Singapore and Taiwan, there will be just 1.5% traded off-exchange, although this compares to a paltry 0.3% in 2008.

Other trends indentified by the report include continued global expansion, which is driving connectivity to new markets such as Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia

In addition, buy-side firms have returned to volume-weighted average price (Vwap) and trade weighted average price (Twap) strategies amidst current volatile market conditions. Meanwhile demand for transaction cost analysis is increasing with 35% of buy-side firms using some type of independent TCA.

Source: Finextra, 23.04.2009

Filed under: Asia, Australia, Exchanges, FIX Connectivity, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Trading Technology , Asia, Exchanges, DMA Direct Market Access, Mercado Electronico, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Taiwan, Korea, Australia, Thailand, Indonesia, Financial Crisis, Algo Trading, Trade, Equity, Dark Pools

FiNETIK – Asia and Latin America – Market News Network

Mexico: safer than Canada ? safer than Brazil!

ETF: BlackRock ETF Landscape Industry Review November 2009

Asia:NPLs and SMEs to provide distressed opportunities

Global warming threat for Asia financial hubs – Yangtze ‘facing climate threat’

Why China and Japan Need an East Asia Bloc

ASEAN markets cross trading links in demand – TABB Group

Asia’s affluent lose one-fifth of wealth in 2008 – CapGemini-Merryll Lynch Asia Wealth Report 2009

Asia calls for own Rating Agency

Surprising Green Energy Investment Trends Found Worldwide

Emerging Markets in the global crisis and beyond- May 2009- DeutscheBank

How to develop Carbon Credits and make money

Emerging Asia inflation tumbles, more rate cuts seen

Asian electronic trading revenues to decline – TABB

Asian equity electronic trading revenues to sink in 2009 – Tabb

Pages

Tags

Search

Asian & Latin American Financial Markets

FiNETIK

Industry Links

News Resources

Categories