International Technical Meeting on Measuring Remittances January 24-25, Washington D.C. Neil Fantom World Bank

Background Sea Island Summit, June 2004: call for G8 countries to work with international agencies and others to improve data G7 Finance Ministers: call for international working group to improve remittance statistics –Clarify and revise definitions and concepts –Better guidance for cost-effective data collection –Improvement of “bilateral” estimates

Purpose of meeting Gain better understanding of the request, and the needs of users Review existing frameworks and ongoing work (what are the gaps?) Review constraints and problems faced by countries in collecting data Develop an appropriate work program, coordinated with existing initiatives

Who attended? International organizations: –WB, IMF, UNSD, OECD, Eurostat, ECB, ADB, IADB Countries and Territories –Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, The Philippines, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Uganda, US, UK Mostly data practitioners, plus policy advisers

Policy issues Important because they are: –Large (particularly for developing countries) –Stable: can cushion shocks –Providing direct benefits for households Better statistics needed to: –Improve financial infrastructure (e.g. by reducing transaction costs) –Understand impact on poverty –Measure trade in relation to GATS Mode 4

Priority needs Priority #1: aggregate estimates Priority #2: estimates of flows between countries Priority #3: data from household surveys For development policy, interest is in household-to-household transfers resulting from movement of people across borders

Frameworks, ongoing work Balance of Payments –Currently no partner detail –Not always reported by countries, or not reported according to definitions Trade in Services: Technical Subgroup on Movement of Natural Persons – Mode 4 –Looking at remittance statistics issues –Linkage with GATS/Mode 4 is problematic Migration statistics definitions

Country presentations Different methods e.g. –“modeled” using demographic data and estimates from household surveys –Banking records Most countries have problems –Coverage (e.g. reporting thresholds) –Lower priority for estimating remittances than other items –Difficulty in classifying residents/non-residents

Use of surveys Studies conducted by Asian and Inter- American Development Banks Household surveys of both remittance senders and receivers Difficulties: –Sampling of senders (rare event problem) –Coverage and response issues –Cost?

Conclusions and way forward BoP is the appropriate conceptual framework for aggregates –“satellite” analysis may be needed TSG has the right people, timetable, process to improve concepts: –but need to de-link from GATS/Mode 4 Need for a “City Group” –improved methods WB/IMF/UN to report on progress by September