Can Bitcoin Deliver on its Promise to the World’s Unbanked?
شنبه, ۱ شهریور ۱۳۹۳، ۱۰:۰۶ ق.ظ
Jason Tyra is a Certified Public Accountant and ACFE Certified Fraud Examiner. In this article, he evaluates the potential benefits bitcoin offers for the world’s impoverished and unbanked, and outlines what needs to be done to give this underserved population access to its ground-breaking technology.
While many relatively affluent westerners have adopted bitcoin as a political statement, a cost-saving measure or a technical curiosity, a very small portion of its users have done so as a result of the demands of their own political or socioeconomic circumstances.
However, for those that potentially stand to gain the most from the digital currency – impoverished and unbanked people living in developing regions of the world – bitcoin remains largely inaccessible.
An objective look at a few of bitcoin’s characteristics and how these apply to developing countries shows that the ecosystem has some room for improvement before it can gain traction among the world’s poor. By pointing out some of these limitations, I hope to help spur development of innovative solutions to mitigate them.
A refuge from insecurity
Bitcoin is a good option for storing wealth where governments and/or banks are untrustworthy, restrictive, or unavailable. Here I mean untrustworthy in the most literal sense.
In spite of the lack of social justice decried by some bitcoiners, rule of law and sanctity of private property are still reliable assumptions in the United States and most other western countries. The vast majority of people living in developed countries don’t fall asleep at night wondering whether their bank will be nationalized overnight or their house seized by the state.
Wealth held in bitcoins can be securely stored free of transaction fees for an indefinite period. Bitcoins cannot easily be expropriated by the state, or limited in any meaningful way in their movement between jurisdictions by capital controls. They cannot be devalued over time by inflationary monetary policies.
Banking hurdles
Starting with the question of why people lack bank accounts in the first place, bitcoin isn’t necessarily helpful. A World Bank report in 2012 cited cost, distance to a banking facility and bureaucratic hurdles as reasons that more than 2.5 billion of the world’s poor lack a bank account.
Among these, cost may be bitcoin’s sole weak point, but it’s a significant one. Cost is not only a measure of the fees charged by banks for the privilege of maintaining an account, but also one of opportunity to consume.
Unless you are a miner, the only way to get bitcoins is to receive them in payment or purchase them with fiat currency. Purchasing with fiat currency usually requires a bank account or at least some way to send money internationally. Having a bank account means that you have official identification (a bureaucratic hurdle) and also that you have been able to defer consumption long enough to have money that you don’t need to spend right away.
The same would be true for wealth ‘stored’ in bitcoin. This can be extremely difficult for people living hand to mouth.
On the subject of mining, the amount of computing power and electricity now required to mine bitcoins places this activity well out of reach of all but the wealthiest enthusiasts. For a citizen of the developing world, mining diamonds or gold is likely to be far easier than mining bitcoins.
Choke points
It is worth pointing out here that remittances are a major source of cash-flow for families in developing countries who have relatives living in the US or other more developed nations. Bitcoin has a niche use here for very low-cost transfers, provided the recipient has a way to spend bitcoins or convert them to fiat.
“If you have no way to get online, then you have very limited ways to send or receive bitcoin.”