I was driving in my car in Germany,

我在德國開車時，

and I turned on the radio.

打開收音機，

Europe at the time was in the middle

歐洲當時

of the Euro crisis,

處於歐債，

and all the headlines were about European countries

所有的頭版都是

getting downgraded by rating agencies

歐洲國家又被

in the United States.

美國評級機構降級的消息。

I listened and thought to myself,

那時我不禁自問：

"What are these rating agencies,

「這些評級機構到底是什麼？

and why is everybody so upset about their work?"

為何大家對它們的評價這麼在意？」

Well, if you were sitting

若那天你是

next to me in the car that day

坐在我旁邊，

and would have told me that I would devote

然後告訴我，

the next years to trying to reform them,

我未來幾年會試著 去改變這些機構，

obviously I would have called you crazy.

我會毫不猶豫地認定你瘋了。

But guess what's really crazy:

但還有更瘋的：

the way these rating agencies are run.

這些評級機構運作的方式。

And I would like to explain to you

我想跟您解釋，

not only why it's time to change this,

為何現在是做出改變的時刻，

but also how we can do it.

同時也會告訴你如何做出改變。

So let me tell you a little bit

讓我來告訴你，

about what rating agencies really do.

評級機構到底是做什麼的。

As you would read a car magazine

就像您會先閱讀汽車雜誌，

before purchasing a new car

再決定要買哪款新車。

or taking a look at a product review

或是看完產品的評價，

before deciding which kind of tablet or phone to get,

再決定要買哪種平板電腦或手機。

investors are reading ratings

投資者也會先看評價，

before they decide in which kind of product

再決定把他們的金錢

they are investing their money.

投資給某種金融產品。

A rating can range from a so-called AAA,

評價制度從所謂的「AAA」，

which means it's a top-performing product,

意味著表現超級亮眼的產品，

and it can go down to the level

降到十分低的評價，

of the so-called BBB-,

稱做「BBB-」，

which means it's a fairly risky investment.

意味著還蠻有風險的投資。

Rating agencies are rating companies.

評級機構不只評級

They are rating banks.

公司、銀行，

They are rating even financial products

還對金融產品評級，

like the infamous mortgage-backed securities.

比如臭名昭著的不動產抵押債券。

But they can also rate countries,

連國家也能納入評價，

and these ratings are called sovereign ratings,

這些評價有稱為「主權評價」。

and I would like to focus in particular

今天我就來重點談談

on these sovereign ratings.

這些主權評價。

And I can tell, as you're listening to me right now,

我看的出，

you're thinking,

在場一定有人納悶著，

so why should I really care about this, right?

為何我會對這些評價這麼在意？

Be honest.

說真心話。

Well, ratings affect you.

這些評價會影響你，

They affect all of us.

也會影響我們所有人。

If a rating agency rates a country,

當評級機構評價一個國家時，

it basically assesses and evaluates

它基本上就是評估

a country's debt

這個國家的債務狀況，

and the ability and willingness of a country

以及這個國家

to repay its debt.

還債的能力和意願。

So if a country gets downgraded by a rating agency,

所以，若評級機構降低一國的評級，

the country has to pay more

那國家就必須在國際市場上

in order to borrow money

付出更多，

on the international markets.

才能夠借錢。

So it affects you as a citizen and as a taxpayer,

所以作為公民及納稅人，你會受影響。

because you and your fellow countrymen

因為你和其它公民

have to pony up more in order to borrow.

必須接受更高的 貨款利息才能借款。

But what if a country can't afford to pay more

若一個國家因為成本過於高昂

because it's maybe too expensive?

而負擔不起怎麼辦?

Well, then the country has less available

這樣一來，國家就無法 提供別的服務，

for other services, like roads, schools, healthcare.

如道路、學校、醫療。

And this is the reason why you should care,

這就是為什麼你該了解此議題，

because sovereign ratings affect everyone.

因為主權評價能夠影響每個人。

And that is the reason why I believe

這就是為什麼我相信，

they should be defined as public goods.

它們該定義為公共財產。

They should be transparent, accessible,

它們應該透眀，易取，

and available to everyone at no cost.

而且免費提供給大眾。

But here's the situation:

但情況來了：

the rating agency market is dominated

評級機構的市場是由

by three players and three players only --

三大主要的角色壟斷的 --

Standard & Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch --

普爾、穆迪、惠譽。

and we know whenever there is a market concentration,

眾所皆知，當市場集中時，

there is really no competition.

競爭就不復存在。

There is no incentive to improve

改善品質的激勵

the quality of your product.

就會消失殆盡。

And let's face it, the credit rating agencies have contributed,

面對現實吧，評級機構

putting the global economy on the brink,

好幾次把全球經濟推向邊緣。

and yet they have to change the way they operate.

所以其運作方式有待改善。

The second point,

第二點就是，

would you really buy a car

你購買汽車時，會單憑

just based on the advice of the dealer?

經銷商給的建議做決定嗎？

Obviously not, right? That would be irresponsible.

肯定不會嘛! 因為這樣不負責任嘛!

But that's actually what's going on

但實際上，這種運作模式

in the rating agency sector every single day.

日復一日地出現在評級領域裡。

The customers of these rating agencies,

這三大評級機構的顧客們，

like countries or companies,

像是國家或者公司，

they are paying for their own ratings,

他們付費獲得自己的評級，

and obviously this is creating

這樣一來無庸置疑地

a conflict of interest.

產生了利益衝突。

The third point is,

第三點就是，

the rating agencies are not really telling us

這些評級機構從未讓我們知道

how they are coming up with their ratings,

他們的評級從何而來。

but in this day and age,

但是在當下，

you can't even sell a candy bar

連推銷一個糖果

without listing everything that's inside.

都得一一列出裡面的成分。

But for ratings, a crucial element of our economy,

然而，評級是經濟構成的重要元素，

we really do not know

我們卻無從得知

what all the different ingredients are.

裡面的任何一樣細節。

We are allowing the rating agencies

我們就這樣讓這些評級機構

to be intransparent about their work,

以不透明的運作方式做出評級，

and we need to change this.

所以我們必須改變現況。

I think there is no doubt that the sector

我想這是一塊

needs a complete overhaul,

亟需全面檢查的區域。

not just a trimming at the margins.

而不僅僅做些不痛不癢的改變，

I think it's time for a bold move.

我認為該是大膽踏出一大步的時候了，

I think it's time to upgrade the system.

是系統升級的時候了。

And this is why we at the Bertelsmann Foundation

這就是為什麼我們「貝塔斯曼基金會」，

have invested a lot of time and effort

投入了大量的時間和精力，

thinking about an alternative for the sector.

為人們提供另一項選擇。

And we have developed the first model

我們已開發出第一個模式，

for a nonprofit rating agency for sovereign risk,

是個非營利的主權評價機構，

and we call it by its acronym, INCRA.

簡稱 INCRA。

INCRA would make a difference

INCRA 會改善

to the current system

現有的系統。

by adding another nonprofit player to the mix.

通過將非營利的評級機構加入戰局，

It would be based on a nonprofit model

它將建立在非營利的模式上，

that would be based on a sustainable endowment.

且會有大量的資金作為後盾。

The endowment would create income

這些資金會創造收入，

that would allow us to run the operation,

讓營運更順暢，

to run the rating agency,

評級機構也會因此受惠。

and it would also allow us

這也讓我們有機會

to make our ratings publicly available.

公開評級的方式。

But this is not enough to make a difference, right?

但這麼做還不足以改變現況，對吧?

INCRA would also be based on

INCRA 也是建立在

a very, very clear governance structure

十分透明的治理結構基礎上，

that would avoid any conflict of interest,

這樣就能避開利益相突，

and it would include many stakeholders from society.

同時吸納許多民間的財產保管人。

INCRA would not only be a European

INCRA 不僅僅是歐洲的、

or an American rating agency,

或者美國的評級機構，

it would be a truly international one,

它會是全球化的評級機構。

in which, in particular, the emerging economies

這樣子，新興經濟才能獲取

would have an equal interest, voice and representation.

平等的利益、話語權和代表權。

The second big difference that INCRA would make is

INCRA 可做出的第二點轉變就是：

that would it base its sovereign risk assessment

它的主權評價會採取

on a broader set of indicators.

更加廣泛的指標做評估。

Think about it that way.

這樣想好了，

If we conduct a sovereign rating,

若由我們進行主權評價，

we basically take a look at

我們基本上會觀察

the economic soil of a country,

一個國家的經濟基本面，

its macroeconomic fundamentals.

它的宏觀經濟基本指標。

But we also have to ask the question,

但我們得先自問：

who is cultivating the economic soil

是誰在蓄養國家的經濟基礎？

of a country, right?

對吧？

Well, a country has many gardeners,

一個國家有許多給經濟施肥的人，

and one of them is the government,

其中之一就是政府。

so we have to ask the question,

下一個問題就是：

how is a country governed?

一個國家是如何管理的?

How is it managed?

又是如何運作的？

And this is the reason why we have developed

這就是為什麼我們要開發

what we call forward-looking indicators.

前膽性的指標。

These are indicators that give you

這些指標能夠

a much better read about

更好地解讀

the socioeconomic development of a country.

一個國家的社會經濟發展。

I hope you would agree it's important for you to know

我希望你會認同接下來的看法：

if your government is willing to invest in renewable energy and education.

若你的政府願意 投資再生能源和教育，

It's important for you to know

你就需要去確認，

if the government of your country

你國家的政府

is able to manage a crisis,

是否有能力解決危機。

if the government is finally able to implement

你的政府是否最終

the reforms that it's promised.

實施了其承諾的改善。

For example, if INCRA would rate

比方說，如果 INCRA

South Africa right now,

目前在評價南非，

of course we would take a very, very close look

我們當然會很密切地審視

at the youth unemployment of the country,

這國家年輕人的失業率，

the highest in the world.

南非的數據是全球最高的。

If over 70 percent of a country's population

若這個國家 35 歲以下的人口中，

under the age of 35 is unemployed,

超過 70% 都失業了，

of course this has a huge impact on the economy

這對經濟的影響當然很大。

today and even more so in the future.

現況都這麼糟了，以後的就更別提了。

Well, our friends at Moody's,

再來看看

Standard & Poor's, and Fitch will tell us

普爾、穆迪、惠譽會說：

we would take this into account as well.

這些都有納入評價。

But guess what? We do not know

但到底有沒有啊? 我們也不知道

exactly how they will take this into account.

究竟他們如何將其納入評價的。

And this leads me to the third big difference

這帶我們來到第 3 個

that INCRA would make.

INCRA 可以做的轉變。

INCRA would not only release its ratings

那就是 INCRA 不只會提供其評價，

but it would also release its indicators

也會顯示其指標

and methodology.

和方法。

So in contrast to the current system,

所以與當今的系統相比，

INCRA would be fully transparent.

INCRA 的評價方式較為透眀。

So in a nutshell,

長話短說，

INCRA would offer an alternative

INCRA 會提供另一項選擇，

to the current system of the big three rating agencies

除了當今的 3 大評級機構以外，

by adding a new, nonprofit player to the mix

再加入一個全新的、非營利的評價機構。

that would increase the competition,

這樣可以增加競爭，

it would increase the transparency of the sector,

為此區塊增加透明度，

and it would also increase the quality.

以及提升品質。

I can tell that sovereign ratings

我明白主權評級對你來說，

may still look to you like this very small piece

可能只是複雜的全球金融系統裡

of this very complex global financial world,

渺小的一部分。

but I tell you it's a very important one,

但我能跟你打包票說，

and a very important one to fix,

這很重要，且極需解決。

because sovereign ratings affect all of us,

因為主權評級會影響每一個人，

and they should be addressed and should be defined

這問題應當解決，

as public goods.

並且應當定義成公共財產。

And this is why we are testing our model right now,

因此我們正在測試這一模式，

and why we are trying to find out if it can

我們在嘗試組建一支

bring together a group of able and willing actors

有意願和能力的隊伍，

to bring INCRA to life.

得以讓 INCRA 發揮其作用。

I truly believe building up INCRA

我堅信，建立 INCRA

is in everyone's interest,

符合在座每一位的利益，

and that we have the unique opportunity right now

現在我們有這難得的機會

to turn INCRA into a cornerstone

打造 INCRA 為踏基石，

of a new, more inclusive financial system.

讓金融系統換然一新，更有包容性。

Because for way too long,

因為我們已經讓

we have left the big financial players on their own.

這些金融巨頭獨霸太久了，

It's time to give them some company.

該是介入的時候了。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

(掌聲)