Opinion

South Korea and Indonesia: a capital match

Mutually beneficial Jakarta-Seoul relationship could develop further with an upgrade in Jakarta’s sovereign debt.

By: Date: November 23, 2016 Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation

This op-ed was originally published in Nikkei Asian Review.

nikkei

South Korea and Indonesia look as though they were made for each other. South Korea has become a net exporter of capital, given its increasingly low return on assets, while Indonesia has a young population and huge capital needs, which ensure a high return on investment. Given its relatively low savings ratio, Indonesia’s current account deficit is understandable. It needs foreign investment – and that is where South Korea comes in.

South Korea is increasingly looking like Japan in the 1990s, although it has higher growth potential and fewer deflationary pressures. Current account surpluses are the source of capital that has allowed Japan, and now South Korea, to become huge net external creditors. Few other countries are in that situation, although Germany and Taiwan are other examples.

In terms of demographics, aging South Korea has huge savings. Its current account surplus has been substantial for many years, and is still growing. It could reach 8% of gross domestic product this year. This has allowed South Korea to shift from being a net external debtor to a net external creditor in only two years.

What is even more amazing is that the total amount of net external wealth has reached $200 billion, a similar level to that of Japan. The key driver behind investment overseas, other than current account surpluses, is low returns on assets domestically. South Korea’s return on assets has fallen rapidly since 2011, pushing savings out of the country – as happened in Japan decades ago.

Using equity indices as a benchmark, the return on assets for the Korea Composite Stock Price Index 200 is 2.1% as of October 2016 – lower than the 2.5% return for the Nikkei 225 Index. As a result, companies are seeking higher returns through a massive increase in outward foreign direct investment, and South Korean institutional investors are looking for outward portfolio investment to secure higher yields for their clients.

High returns

Looking across Asia, Indonesia is the perfect partner for South Korea. Strong population growth drives huge infrastructure needs, while its very small stock of capital ensures high returns. Indonesia’s annual economic growth is estimated to hover between 5% and 6% depending on how much it manages to limit growth bottlenecks in infrastructure and human capital.

What Indonesia needs is what South Korean companies are looking for. The Indonesian government has prioritized investment in energy, utilities and logistics infrastructure, while interest in further exploiting mining opportunities has fallen. This set of preferences is much more akin to South Korean companies’ comparative advantages. In fact, their share of global outward foreign direct investment in construction and utilities surged to 12.4% in 2015, compared with just 3.4% two years ago.

Also, given Indonesia’s relatively low level of domestic savings, it remains dependent on foreign capital to finance some of its investment needs. About 40% of securities issued by the Indonesian government is bought by foreign investors. This structural need for foreign capital means that Indonesia will continue to run current account deficits and will remain a higher-yield economy than those with excess savings.

Given their complementary needs, the final question is how the growing financial relationship between the two countries can be nurtured. One answer would be an upgrading of Indonesian sovereign debt by one notch to investment grade. Many South Korean institutional investors are restricted to countries awarded investment grade ratings.

A better investment environment and better enforcement of the rule of law in Indonesia would also be welcome, as would deeper liquidity in financial markets offering greater hedging opportunities. But these things can come later as the country and its financial markets develop. Investment grade status should come first, and Indonesia is clearly not far from achieving it.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to communication@bruegel.org.

View comments
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Jun
24
08:30

China’s investment in Africa: consequences for Europe

How is Chinese investment impacting Africa, and what could be the consequences for Europe?

Speakers: Solange Chatelard, Maria Demertzis, Alicia García-Herrero and Abraham Liu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

External Publication

Effectiveness of cohesion policy: learning from the project characteristics that produce the best results

This study by Zsolt Darvas, Antoine Mathieu Collin, Jan Mazza, and Catarina Midões analyses the characteristics of cohesion policy projects that can contribute to successful outcomes. Their analysis is based on a literature survey, an econometric analysis and interviews with stakeholders. About two dozen project characteristics are considered, and their association with economic growth is studied using a novel methodology. Based on the findings, the study concludes with recommendations for cohesion policy reform.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Antoine Mathieu Collin, Jan Mazza and Catarina Midoes Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 11, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

A European atlas of economic success and failure

Economic growth was diverse across EU regions, yet it is crucial to control for region-specific factors in assessing growth performance. We find that there are rather successful regions in many EU countries, suggesting that the EU can provide a good framework for growth. Yet the worst performers are more concentrated in some countries, suggesting that country-specific factors can play a major role in regional development.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Jan Mazza and Catarina Midoes Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 3, 2019
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Policy Contribution

How to improve European Union cohesion policy for the next decade

This policy contribution investigates the performance of the design, implementation and effectiveness of cohesion policy, the most evaluated EU tool for promoting economic convergence. By analysing the effects of cohesion policy on economic growth through reviewing literature, conducting empirical research by comparing regions, as well as considering attitudes and expectations collected through interviewing stakeholders, the authors provide reform recommendations.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Jan Mazza and Catarina Midoes Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 23, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The latest European growth-rate estimates

The quarterly growth rate of the euro area in Q1 2019 was 0.4% (1.5% annualized), considerably higher than the low growth rates of the previous two quarters. This blog reviews the reaction to the release of these numbers and the discussion they have triggered about the euro area’s economic challenges.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 20, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Deep Focus: Reforming and rejuvenating Russia’s economy

Bruegel fellow Marek Dabrowski talks to Sean Gibson about the underlying causes of Russia's slow emergence from economic crisis, in an episode of the Deep Focus podcast series.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 9, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

When facts change, change the pact

“When facts change, I change my mind,” John Maynard Keynes famously said. With long-term interest rates currently near zero, the European Union should reform its fiscal framework to allow member states to increase their debt-financed public investments.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 1, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

What else China can do to support growth in the short term

Recent data shows the downward spiral in the Chinese economy has somewhat eased on a cyclical basis, but it is still too early to cheer for a full stabilization.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 23, 2019
Read article Download PDF More by this author

Parliamentary Testimony

Promoting sustainable and inclusive growth and convergence in the European Union

This speech was delivered by Guntram Wolff at the Informal ECOFIN Meeting in Bucharest on 5 April 2019.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Testimonies Date: April 8, 2019
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

Promoting sustainable and inclusive growth and convergence in the European Union

This Policy Contribution was written for the Informal ECOFIN Meeting, Bucharest, 5 April 2019. The authors look at the EU’s economic agenda, discussing the priorities for the next five years.

By: Maria Demertzis, André Sapir and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: April 4, 2019
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Parliamentary Testimony

Effectiveness of cohesion policy: Learning from the project characteristics that produce the best results

Testimony at the Committee on Budgetary Control of the European Parliament.

By: Zsolt Darvas, Antoine Mathieu Collin, Jan Mazza and Catarina Midoes Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 27, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The shadow of Brexit: Guessing the economic damage to the UK

Under a set of assumptions, this post concludes that UK real income and investment would have been 4% and 6% larger respectively had it not been for the shock of the Brexit referendum result. With somewhat audacious assumptions, the damages already incurred can be scaled up to guess the negative macroeconomic consequence of each of the three possible Brexit outcomes: no-deal, deal or no Brexit.

By: Francesco Papadia Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 21, 2019
Load more posts