Мировые дисбалансы сбережений и инвестиций
The main problems of modern Russian households are analyzed in the article. The factors affecting the behavior of the Russians in the financial markets are considered. The features of the Russian labor market transformation are revealed.
The objective of this paper is to find out which banks the Russian households trust more and whether they really prefer to keep their savings in the institutions that they verbally prefer. Russian households traditionally trust state-controlled banks and particularly the national champion (Sberbank) at the expense of privately-owned deposit-taking institutions. The gap in the level of trust between state-controlled banks and all others remains deep and unlikely to disappear. There is little hope in self-sustaining business of private banks that would rest on the inflow of private savings at reasonable rates. The policy implication of this finding is that the authorities will face the dilemma of ever increasing the level of private savings protection under the deposit insurance scheme (as well as the resulting public costs) in order to keep the smaller market participants afloat, or give up on the idealistic drive to artifically enhance competition in the household savings market.
In the domain of personal savings, Russia today is characterised by three main features: quite modest amount of accumulated money (total amount is equal to 12 per cent of GNP; per capita amount of saving is equal to -300), great social and geographical unevenness of savings' distribution (not more than 20 per cent of adult population have got any savings; one-third of all savings are concentrated in Moscow), and a very big portion of money saved in cash form (half of the total amount of savings). A strong propensity to save in cash is determined for the most part by a strong and growing mistrust in private banks and securities. Theoretically speaking, the amount and distribution of savings make it possible to transform into investment about 30-40 per cent of cash savings (-7-10 billion). But mistrust in private financial instruments and structures makes it unreal at least in a short-run prospect.
This paper examines what influences Russian households‟ decisions to save and borrow. We use the 2008 data from the 17th round of the Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS-HSE). Our results show that the determinants of saving and borrowing are not only those suggested by economic theory but also include psychological and sociological considerations: smarter respondents, who are satisfied with their lives and inclined to help other people, are more likely to save. Those who enjoy stable or improving financial conditions and/or are satisfied with them are more likely to save and less likely to borrow. Financial literacy, a factor cited by institutional theory as positive for both saving and borrowing from banks, lost its significance at the onset of the financial crisis. Household income, suggested by economic theory as a basis for choosing a financial strategy, was found to have much less influence on savings and to have a positive influence on borrowing, confirming the rationing theory rather than intertemporal choice theory. Surprisingly, the fear of job loss does not make people save more, contrary to the precautionary motive.