International Technical Meeting
on Measuring Remittances
January 24-25, Washington D.C.
Neil Fantom
World Bank
http://www.worldbank.org/data
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 InterAmerican 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