CBDC 與快速支付系統 (FPS) 和電子貨幣：國際貨幣基金組織權衡選擇

國際貨幣基金組織 (IMF) 於 2024 年 10 月發布了一篇論文，研究了 CBDC、FPS 和電子貨幣之間的可能選擇。

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has examined the possible options between retail central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), fast payment systems (FPSs), and e-money in an October 2024 paper.

國際貨幣基金組織 (IMF) 在 2024 年 10 月的一篇論文中研究了零售央行數位貨幣 (CBDC)、快速支付系統 (FPS) 和電子貨幣之間的可能選擇。

With a particular emphasis on emerging markets, the paper underscores the risks that dollar stablecoins and foreign CBDCs pose to monetary sovereignty.

該論文特別強調了新興市場，強調了美元穩定幣和外國 CBDC 對貨幣主權構成的風險。

“The IMF is often approached with the question of how a retail central bank digital currency (CBDC) compares to fast payment systems (FPSs) and even e-money, and which to prioritize in the context of constrained resources.

「國際貨幣基金組織經常被問及零售央行數位貨幣（CBDC）與快速支付系統（FPS）甚至電子貨幣相比如何，以及在資源有限的情況下優先考慮哪一個的問題。

There is no ‘one answer’ to this question; working through this analysis requires authorities to carefully consider their jurisdictions’ payments landscape, their objectives and core needs, and the practical constraints which they face.

這個問題沒有「唯一的答案」；透過這項分析，當局需要仔細考慮其轄區的支付格局、目標和核心需求以及面臨的實際限制。

”

」

According to the global institution, the fundamental difference between CBDC, FPS, and e-money is that CBDCs are first and foremost a form of central bank money that could sustain the presence and choice to use a publicly issued money, as well as a public payment solution, in a retail payments landscape which may otherwise be moving toward 100 percent private money.

根據該全球機構的說法，CBDC、FPS 和電子貨幣之間的根本區別在於，CBDC 首先是中央銀行貨幣的一種形式，可以維持公開發行貨幣以及公共貨幣的存在和選擇。方案，否則可能會走向100% 私人貨幣。

In contrast, FPSs are payment arrangements to smooth and accelerate the transfer of private liabilities, and e-money are private liabilities which act as an alternative to bank deposits with a lower access threshold in many markets.

相較之下，FPS是平滑和加速私人負債轉移的支付安排，而電子貨幣是私人負債，在許多市場中作為銀行存款的替代品，進入門檻較低。

Brazil's Pix and India's UPI represent two prominent FPS success stories of recent years, according to IMF.

據國際貨幣基金組織稱，巴西的 Pix 和印度的 UPI 代表了近年來 FPS 的兩個著名成功案例。

Meanwhile, the success of Alipay and WeChat Pay in China and M-Pesa in Kenya, categorized as E-money, showcases how primarily closed-loop systems can establish a substantial market share through network effects.

同時，中國的支付寶和微信支付以及肯亞的M-Pesa（被歸類為電子貨幣）的成功展示了主要閉環系統如何透過網路效應建立可觀的市場份額。

According to the IMF, CBDC has two distinct benefits. The most significant benefit is maintaining retail access to central bank money as cash usage declines, noting a troubling trend whereby as cash becomes less utilized, fewer merchants are inclined to accept it.

根據國際貨幣基金組織的說法，CBDC 有兩個明顯的好處。最顯著的好處是，隨著現金使用量的下降，零售業仍能獲得央行資金，並注意到一個令人不安的趨勢，即隨著現金使用量的減少，願意接受現金的商家越來越少。

By providing access to a CBDC, central banks can effectively tackle the two primary threats to monetary sovereignty posed by stablecoins and foreign CBDCs.

透過提供 CBDC 的存取權限，央行可以有效應對穩定幣和外國 CBDC 對貨幣主權的兩個主要威脅。

“Although stablecoins have not gained much use outside of crypto-asset ecosystems in advanced economies, preliminary data suggest that in emerging and developing market economies, they are being used in a limited capacity for cross-border transactions and remittances (FSB 2024).”

「儘管穩定幣在已開發經濟體的加密資產生態系統之外尚未得到太多應用，但初步數據表明，在新興和發展中市場經濟體中，穩定幣在跨境交易和匯款方面的使用能力有限（ FSB 2024）。

The same analysis also suggested that there was a perceived preference for U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins as a store of value in countries with high inflation, currency devaluation, or the presence of capital flow measures, the authors wrote.

作者寫道，同一分析也表明，在通貨膨脹高、貨幣貶值或存在資本流動措施的國家，人們普遍偏好以美元計價的穩定幣作為價值儲存手段。

They warn that if there's significant adoption, a stablecoin could start being used as an alternative unit of account.

他們警告說，如果穩定幣被廣泛採用，那麼穩定幣可能會開始被用作替代記帳單位。

The IMF also sees competition as another area where a CBDC can offer advantages. Private faster payment systems (FPS) may limit competition, while many e-money systems operate as closed loops, potentially leading to monopolistic behavior.

國際貨幣基金組織也將競爭視為 CBDC 可以提供優勢的另一個領域。私人快速支付系統（FPS）可能會限制競爭，而許多電子貨幣系統作為閉環運行，可能導致壟斷行為。

In contrast, the IMF believes that a CBDC could reduce barriers for non-bank payment service providers fostering greater competition in the financial ecosystem.

相較之下，國際貨幣基金組織認為，CBDC 可以減少非銀行支付服務提供者的障礙，從而促進金融生態系統的更大競爭。