评论“为什么金融科技没有改变日本银行业”

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Yuko Kawai
{"title":"评论“为什么金融科技没有改变日本银行业”","authors":"Yuko Kawai","doi":"10.1111/aepr.12394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) argues that Japan's FinTech is underdeveloped as banks and their customers, especially the elderly and conservative corporate customers, cling to the traditional financial service formats. He further argues that the supremacy of banking services before the Internet era may have hindered changes on the supply side, that is, the service level was sufficiently convenient therefore the relevant parties did not want to expose themselves to the risks of cyberattacks and the costs of system renewals. Iwashita also mentions that the aging population may have worked against digitization due to the low digital literacy of the elderly.</p><p>Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) also touches on the possibility of near-future developments, to be prompted by the global advancements in digitalization, the supporting attitude of the Japanese government to promote technological progresses, and the changing attitudes of customers. The change of tax filing obligations expected in 2023 is also mentioned as a factor which may promote the electronification of receipts and invoices, leading to more digital payments.</p><p>I agree with most of the points presented in Iwashita (<span>2022</span>). While Japan's FinTech industry became active in around 2015,<sup>1</sup> which almost coincided with the timing of the start of FinTech activities in other parts of the world, the progress of less-cash and more-efficient financial services has been slower in Japan in comparison to her international peers since then. As Iwashita indicates, the Covid crisis has accelerated the change of attitudes of financial institutions, customers and the government in Japan.</p><p>To further deepen the analysis and enhance the value of the recommendations presented by Iwashita (<span>2022</span>), I would like to suggest following points.</p><p>First, to expand the list of possible actions by banks and the government to promote FinTech in Japan, it may be worthwhile to identify changes of the payment systems in some European countries achieving less-cash status while, like Japan, their societies are aging and their banking systems are well developed. Sweden, where cash usage has decreased in an extraordinary manner (Riksbank (Sweden), <span>2017</span>; Bach <i>et al</i>., <span>2018</span>), suggests that the central bank's actions to promote an effective cash handling system by imposing the costs on to the private sector, and technological developments to make digital methods cheaper and more convenient may have contributed to the extraordinary rapid decline of cash usage. Another analysis (Riksbank (Sweden), <span>2020</span>) offers the hypothesis that the combination of a couple of events, such as the introduction of mandatory receipt issuance for cash and the popularization of a bank-consortium-led digital payment application, made cash less attractive to digital methods. By learning from these examples, Japan may be able to build concrete action plans to promote FinTech.</p><p>Second, the discussion of the possible risks of digitalized financial services, and solutions to such risks, may be appreciated as the negative consequences need to be considered in the promotion of FinTech. For example, the Bank of Japan has mentioned some concerns over a private sector-driven cashless society, such as the imperfect substitution to legal tender cash payments in light with the level of security or the geographic distribution, and concluded that the issuance of Central Bank Digital Currency might serve as the solution (Bank of Japan, <span>2020</span>). It may also be useful to list the desirable features of FinTech services to reduce potential problems, such as security, resilience, universal access, the instant payment capability (settlement finality), and interoperability.<sup>2</sup></p><p>I would like to conclude my comment by echoing Iwashita's remark to put the importance in the “meeting users'” needs and providing greater profitability. The final goal is not the promotion of FinTech itself, but the improvement of the productivity from the users' viewpoints. I believe the root-cause analysis of the current status presented by Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) will greatly contribute to the near future changes of Japanese banking industry.</p>","PeriodicalId":45430,"journal":{"name":"Asian Economic Policy Review","volume":"17 2","pages":"311-312"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aepr.12394","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comment on “Why Fintech Is Not Changing Japanese Banking”\",\"authors\":\"Yuko Kawai\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aepr.12394\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) argues that Japan's FinTech is underdeveloped as banks and their customers, especially the elderly and conservative corporate customers, cling to the traditional financial service formats. He further argues that the supremacy of banking services before the Internet era may have hindered changes on the supply side, that is, the service level was sufficiently convenient therefore the relevant parties did not want to expose themselves to the risks of cyberattacks and the costs of system renewals. Iwashita also mentions that the aging population may have worked against digitization due to the low digital literacy of the elderly.</p><p>Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) also touches on the possibility of near-future developments, to be prompted by the global advancements in digitalization, the supporting attitude of the Japanese government to promote technological progresses, and the changing attitudes of customers. The change of tax filing obligations expected in 2023 is also mentioned as a factor which may promote the electronification of receipts and invoices, leading to more digital payments.</p><p>I agree with most of the points presented in Iwashita (<span>2022</span>). While Japan's FinTech industry became active in around 2015,<sup>1</sup> which almost coincided with the timing of the start of FinTech activities in other parts of the world, the progress of less-cash and more-efficient financial services has been slower in Japan in comparison to her international peers since then. As Iwashita indicates, the Covid crisis has accelerated the change of attitudes of financial institutions, customers and the government in Japan.</p><p>To further deepen the analysis and enhance the value of the recommendations presented by Iwashita (<span>2022</span>), I would like to suggest following points.</p><p>First, to expand the list of possible actions by banks and the government to promote FinTech in Japan, it may be worthwhile to identify changes of the payment systems in some European countries achieving less-cash status while, like Japan, their societies are aging and their banking systems are well developed. Sweden, where cash usage has decreased in an extraordinary manner (Riksbank (Sweden), <span>2017</span>; Bach <i>et al</i>., <span>2018</span>), suggests that the central bank's actions to promote an effective cash handling system by imposing the costs on to the private sector, and technological developments to make digital methods cheaper and more convenient may have contributed to the extraordinary rapid decline of cash usage. Another analysis (Riksbank (Sweden), <span>2020</span>) offers the hypothesis that the combination of a couple of events, such as the introduction of mandatory receipt issuance for cash and the popularization of a bank-consortium-led digital payment application, made cash less attractive to digital methods. By learning from these examples, Japan may be able to build concrete action plans to promote FinTech.</p><p>Second, the discussion of the possible risks of digitalized financial services, and solutions to such risks, may be appreciated as the negative consequences need to be considered in the promotion of FinTech. For example, the Bank of Japan has mentioned some concerns over a private sector-driven cashless society, such as the imperfect substitution to legal tender cash payments in light with the level of security or the geographic distribution, and concluded that the issuance of Central Bank Digital Currency might serve as the solution (Bank of Japan, <span>2020</span>). It may also be useful to list the desirable features of FinTech services to reduce potential problems, such as security, resilience, universal access, the instant payment capability (settlement finality), and interoperability.<sup>2</sup></p><p>I would like to conclude my comment by echoing Iwashita's remark to put the importance in the “meeting users'” needs and providing greater profitability. The final goal is not the promotion of FinTech itself, but the improvement of the productivity from the users' viewpoints. I believe the root-cause analysis of the current status presented by Iwashita (<span>2022</span>) will greatly contribute to the near future changes of Japanese banking industry.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Economic Policy Review\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"311-312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aepr.12394\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Economic Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aepr.12394\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Economic Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aepr.12394","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

Iwashita(2022)认为,由于银行及其客户,特别是老年人和保守的企业客户,坚持传统的金融服务模式,日本的金融科技不发达。他进一步认为,在互联网时代之前,银行服务的霸权可能阻碍了供给侧的变化,即服务水平足够方便,因此相关方不愿意承担网络攻击的风险和系统更新的成本。Iwashita还提到,由于老年人的数字素养较低,人口老龄化可能会阻碍数字化。Iwashita(2022)还谈到了近期发展的可能性,这是由全球数字化的进步、日本政府对促进技术进步的支持态度以及客户态度的变化所推动的。预计2023年税务申报义务的变化也被认为是可能促进收据和发票电子化的一个因素,从而导致更多的数字支付。我同意岩田(2022)中提出的大部分观点。虽然日本的金融科技行业在2015年左右开始活跃,1几乎与世界其他地区的金融科技活动开始的时间一致,但自那时以来,与国际同行相比,日本的低现金和更高效的金融服务的进展一直较慢。正如Iwashita所说,新冠疫情加速了日本金融机构、客户和政府态度的转变。为了进一步深化分析,提升Iwashita(2022)提出的建议的价值,我想提出以下几点建议。首先,为了扩大银行和政府在日本推广金融科技的可能行动清单,可能值得确定一些欧洲国家实现较少现金状态的支付系统的变化,而像日本一样,他们的社会正在老龄化,他们的银行系统也很发达。瑞典,现金使用量以非同寻常的方式下降(瑞典央行,2017年);巴赫等人(Bach et al., 2018)的研究表明,央行通过将成本强加给私营部门来促进有效现金处理系统的行动,以及使数字方法更便宜、更方便的技术发展,可能导致了现金使用量的快速下降。另一项分析(Riksbank (Sweden), 2020)提出了这样一个假设,即一些事件的结合,例如引入强制性现金收据发行和银行-财团主导的数字支付应用的普及,使现金对数字方法的吸引力降低。通过从这些例子中学习,日本也许能够制定具体的行动计划来促进金融科技。其次,讨论数字化金融服务可能存在的风险,以及解决这些风险的方法,可能会受到赞赏,因为在推动金融科技的过程中需要考虑到负面后果。例如,日本银行提到了对私营部门驱动的无现金社会的一些担忧,例如根据安全水平或地理分布,法定货币现金支付的不完美替代,并得出结论,发行中央银行数字货币可能是解决方案(日本银行,2020)。列出金融科技服务的理想功能也可能是有用的,以减少潜在的问题,如安全性、弹性、普遍访问、即时支付能力(结算终局性)和互操作性。在结束我的评论时,我想重申岩田聪的观点,即重视“满足用户”的需求和提供更大的盈利能力。最终的目标不是推广FinTech本身,而是从用户的角度提高生产力。我相信Iwashita(2022)对现状的根本原因分析将对日本银行业在不久的将来的变化有很大的帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comment on “Why Fintech Is Not Changing Japanese Banking”

Iwashita (2022) argues that Japan's FinTech is underdeveloped as banks and their customers, especially the elderly and conservative corporate customers, cling to the traditional financial service formats. He further argues that the supremacy of banking services before the Internet era may have hindered changes on the supply side, that is, the service level was sufficiently convenient therefore the relevant parties did not want to expose themselves to the risks of cyberattacks and the costs of system renewals. Iwashita also mentions that the aging population may have worked against digitization due to the low digital literacy of the elderly.

Iwashita (2022) also touches on the possibility of near-future developments, to be prompted by the global advancements in digitalization, the supporting attitude of the Japanese government to promote technological progresses, and the changing attitudes of customers. The change of tax filing obligations expected in 2023 is also mentioned as a factor which may promote the electronification of receipts and invoices, leading to more digital payments.

I agree with most of the points presented in Iwashita (2022). While Japan's FinTech industry became active in around 2015,1 which almost coincided with the timing of the start of FinTech activities in other parts of the world, the progress of less-cash and more-efficient financial services has been slower in Japan in comparison to her international peers since then. As Iwashita indicates, the Covid crisis has accelerated the change of attitudes of financial institutions, customers and the government in Japan.

To further deepen the analysis and enhance the value of the recommendations presented by Iwashita (2022), I would like to suggest following points.

First, to expand the list of possible actions by banks and the government to promote FinTech in Japan, it may be worthwhile to identify changes of the payment systems in some European countries achieving less-cash status while, like Japan, their societies are aging and their banking systems are well developed. Sweden, where cash usage has decreased in an extraordinary manner (Riksbank (Sweden), 2017; Bach et al., 2018), suggests that the central bank's actions to promote an effective cash handling system by imposing the costs on to the private sector, and technological developments to make digital methods cheaper and more convenient may have contributed to the extraordinary rapid decline of cash usage. Another analysis (Riksbank (Sweden), 2020) offers the hypothesis that the combination of a couple of events, such as the introduction of mandatory receipt issuance for cash and the popularization of a bank-consortium-led digital payment application, made cash less attractive to digital methods. By learning from these examples, Japan may be able to build concrete action plans to promote FinTech.

Second, the discussion of the possible risks of digitalized financial services, and solutions to such risks, may be appreciated as the negative consequences need to be considered in the promotion of FinTech. For example, the Bank of Japan has mentioned some concerns over a private sector-driven cashless society, such as the imperfect substitution to legal tender cash payments in light with the level of security or the geographic distribution, and concluded that the issuance of Central Bank Digital Currency might serve as the solution (Bank of Japan, 2020). It may also be useful to list the desirable features of FinTech services to reduce potential problems, such as security, resilience, universal access, the instant payment capability (settlement finality), and interoperability.2

I would like to conclude my comment by echoing Iwashita's remark to put the importance in the “meeting users'” needs and providing greater profitability. The final goal is not the promotion of FinTech itself, but the improvement of the productivity from the users' viewpoints. I believe the root-cause analysis of the current status presented by Iwashita (2022) will greatly contribute to the near future changes of Japanese banking industry.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The goal of the Asian Economic Policy Review is to become an intellectual voice on the current issues of international economics and economic policy, based on comprehensive and in-depth analyses, with a primary focus on Asia. Emphasis is placed on identifying key issues at the time - spanning international trade, international finance, the environment, energy, the integration of regional economies and other issues - in order to furnish ideas and proposals to contribute positively to the policy debate in the region.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信