The McKinsey Quarterly

  • Recommend (101)
  • Text Size
  • Print
  • Download PDF
  • Link to This

The era of cheap capital draws to a close

Interest rates are rising in the long term. Businesses will have to adapt, while governments must prevent an era of creeping financial protectionism.

The global economy faces a dilemma. Attempts to boost growth have lowered interest rates in advanced economies. The resulting hot money has moved exchange rates out of line with fundamentals, creating inflation and asset appreciation in the developing world. Accumulation of foreign reserves and the imposition of barriers to inward capital flows have begun to replace tariffs and quotas in the trade protectionism arsenals of governments.

Yet even as brewing currency wars threaten full-blown trade conflicts, we must remember one fact: this moment will not last. The 30-year era of progressively cheaper capital is nearing an end. The global economy will soon have to cope with too little capital, not too much. And worries about hot capital moving too quickly into emerging markets could soon be replaced by an era of financial protectionism—in which governments restrict outflows of capital as a defense against rising interest rates for corporations and consumers.

Since 1980, differences in the cost of capital in most countries have converged as financial markets globalized and risk premiums in developing countries fell. Capital became plentiful, and long-term interest rates declined too—primarily as a result of falling investment in assets such as infrastructure and machinery. Global investment fell dramatically, creating a decline in the demand for capital substantially larger than the growth in supply created by Asian current-account surpluses. In other words, the “saving glut” so often cited as a cause for low interest rates really resulted from a decline in global investment.

Today, however, this trend is reversing. Across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, rapid urbanization is increasing the demand for roads, water, power, housing, and factories. Global investment demand will now rise considerably up to 2030, reaching levels not seen since the postwar reconstruction of Europe and Japan.

The global appetite to save, however, is unlikely to rise in step, for several reasons. China plans to encourage more domestic consumption. Spending will rise as populations age. Even increased expenditure to address or adapt to climate change will play a part. As a result, the world will soon enter a new era of scarce capital and rising real long-term interest rates. Such rates will in turn constrain investment and could ultimately slow global economic growth by as much as 1 percent a year.

An era of sustained tighter capital will have significant implications. Governments should anticipate higher costs of debt and act now to improve their public finances. The fiscal deficits possible with recent low interest rates will not be as easily financed in the future and could result in greater crowding out of private investment.

Yet even with restrained public finances, there is still a very real danger that governments will quickly resort to financial protectionism to insulate their economies from rising capital costs. New rules could be introduced to stop state-insured banks or domestic pension funds from lending and investing abroad or to direct sovereign-wealth funds to make only domestic investments. Such moves would be self-defeating for the global economy. Real interest rates would diverge between countries, meaning that nations with big current-account deficits would suffer lower growth. Savers in surplus countries, meanwhile, would receive lower returns too.

Governments must therefore be vigilant for early signs of capital hoarding, while international institutions must start to develop the financial architecture needed for a capital-constrained world. New mechanisms—supplemented by properly regulated cross-border bank intermediation—are needed to facilitate the flow of capital from the world’s savers to the places where it can be invested.

New ways of financing infrastructure in emerging markets will also be important, given their low domestic savings. Emerging economies must work to develop deeper and more stable financial markets to increase local savings, while mature economies should introduce policies to spur household saving (or at least reduce borrowing).

Businesses will also need to adapt to a world in which capital costs more. Just as Japanese companies with access to cheap capital in the 1980s held an advantage over Western peers, companies with access to inexpensive capital—for example, those based in high-saving countries such as China or with links to sovereign-wealth funds—will have a new source of competitive advantage. Financing is likely to become bundled with exports as a source of distinctiveness, while financial institutions need to refocus their businesses on accessing new global sources of savings.

For three decades, the world has grown used to cheaper capital. But the next stage of globalization will be different. Governments will soon want to stockpile capital, and efforts to boost today’s global recovery must also anticipate an era in which capital scarcity places new brakes on growth. A future of creeping financial protectionism would be just as destructive as today’s currency wars. We must begin to take precautions.

About the Authors

Richard Dobbs is a director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a director in McKinsey’s Seoul office. Michael Spence, a recipient of the 2001 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, serves on the faculty of New York University’s Stern School of Business. This article, originally published in the January 31 edition of the Financial Times (registration required), is based on the MGI report Farewell to cheap capital? The implications of long-term shifts in global investment and saving .

Recommend (101)
  • 10 FEBRUARY 2011
    Amit Upadhyay
    Project Manager
    India

    ...Developing versus developed economies will remain the main concern. What may be good for a developed economy may not work for an emerging market. Its a selfish world....

    .
    Amit Upadhyay
    Project Manager
    India

    Raising cheap capital may not be the concern. I feel its the other way around. Deploying this capital in places which can give better returns with low risk. Capital flow from developed world to emerging markets have already fuelled inflation to some extent.

    Developing versus developed economies will remain the main concern. What may be good for a developed economy may not work for an emerging market. Its a selfish world.

    I doubt they will ever reach a consensus on how best the capital can be deployed.

    .
  • 8 FEBRUARY 2011
    Kamal Gupta
    CEO
    Edseva
    Delhi, India

    Why wasn’t the pumping of liquidity accompanied by announcements of public works in the US and Europe?...

    .
    Kamal Gupta
    CEO
    Edseva
    Delhi, India

    Why wasn’t the pumping of liquidity accompanied by announcements of public works in the US and Europe? That way, liquidity would have stayed more at home, jobs would have been created, infrastructure like railroads, green energy, etcetera, could have been built to increase future competitiveness.

    .
  • 7 FEBRUARY 2011
    Chrisrtopher Frey
    Chairman, CEO
    CF Group of Activities
    Hamilton, Bermuda

    An interesting article, but it misses the real dilemma. We are heading towards a knowledge-based society but do not have the right tools to finance knowledge. This is what we have to solve!...

    .
    Chrisrtopher Frey
    Chairman, CEO
    CF Group of Activities
    Hamilton, Bermuda

    An interesting article, but it misses the real dilemma. We are heading towards a knowledge-based society but do not have the right tools to finance knowledge. This is what we have to solve!

    Regarding too much, too cheap, or too little capital I wouldn’t worry so much. What bothers me is the allocation. Money burned on redundant real estate (it is so ‘safe’ because you can touch it) but no money for intangible assets, that really drives me ill.

    .
  • 7 FEBRUARY 2011
    Harsh Pant
    Sr Consultant
    SAP
    San Jose, CA US

    ...I doubt there was any “global savings glut” at all. From the US to China, people everywhere have been living paycheck to paycheck....

    .
    Harsh Pant
    Sr Consultant
    SAP
    San Jose, CA US

    ‘the “saving glut” so often cited as a cause for low interest rates really resulted from a decline in global investment.’

    I doubt there was any “global savings glut” at all. From the US to China, people everywhere have been living paycheck to paycheck. (The Chinese CAS makes us think that Chinese households have been saving up money but really the savings had been at the corporate and government levels only, and now the Chinese government seems to be clear on changing this, and pushing a greater share of corporate revenue down to regular workers). There was rather a money supply and monetary base glut via central banks (banking system), and high lending leverages (low reserve ratios). But it sure got joined by “fall in investments into infrastructure and machinery”, so we got boomtime in financial and real estate assets.

    The Chinese move to increase the revenue to the hands of the workers could do two things, at least for China. Part of it will increase demand (and so provide a reason for fresh investment into production machinery), while another part could well become household savings becoming available for investment in production. The latter could provide some cushion against decreased money creation (’austerity’) by central banks.

    .
  • 7 FEBRUARY 2011
    Eli Santiago
    VP Operations
    Human Arc
    Cleveland, OH USA

    ...What capital collaboration incentives are there for both developed and developing countries when there are no common market goals that provide wins for all parties at the table?

    .
    Eli Santiago
    VP Operations
    Human Arc
    Cleveland, OH USA

    Two basic questions surface:
    1. How do you encourage household savings when this is counter to a world culture that depends so much on spending on consumer disposable and durable goods, hence the glut of offers of easy credit?
    2. What capital collaboration incentives are there for both developed and developing countries when there are no common market goals that provide wins for all parties at the table?

    .
Submit Your Comments

The user information you enter into this form will not update your site profile. To update your profile, please visit your profile page.

Subject The era of cheap capital draws to a close

*Required

We may publish your comments online and in the print edition of McKinsey Quarterly. Those chosen, which may be edited for length and clarity, will appear along with your name and details, but not your e-mail address. We will use your e-mail address only to send you a confirmation copy of your comments and to notify you if we publish them online.

We value your feedback and will consider it carefully. Nonetheless, we receive so many comments that we cannot acknowledge all of them.

See also:
Preview

Embed E-mail