Shirish Wadivkar:区块链的核心价值是“可靠性” 而非“低成本”

出品人:巫云峰

监制:胡雯

主笔:鲍方 何佳佳

编辑:张仙

UI设计: 宋鹏

网页制作:盛维玮

  • 渣打
嘉宾简介

Shirish Wadivkar,渣打集团交易银行部代理行业务全球产品总监,负责银行间清结算与交易的产品战略,推动银行在SWIFT GPI技术、区块链/分布式账本技术以及RippleNet技术的投资和商业化。

Shirish Wadivkar is the Global Head for Correspondent Banking Products for Transaction Banking in Standard Chartered. Based in Singapore, he heads the Clearing & Trade product strategy for Corresponding Banking and drives the commercialisation of the Bank’s investments in SWIFT GPI, blockchain/Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) and RippleNet.

核心要点

在跨境支付业务中,RippleNet的核心价值体现在其“可靠性”。因为RippleNet背后的区块链技术有“预验证”步骤,可以实现转账人与收款人双方信息同步,从而保证“到账即看到”,避免出现传统银行因系统原因引致的“到账却不及时显示”等问题。对于客户而言,RippleNet的转账服务可靠性更高、速度更快。

引入SWIFT GPI技术后,传统跨境转账系统已不再缓慢、低效。即使如此,以RippleNet为代表的区块链技术具备的“高可靠性”与“快速服务”能力,在银行业依然拥有广阔的发展空间。

传统跨境支付技术SWIFT已经实现数据标准化,但区块链技术尚未实现数据标准统一。目前来看,如果不能解决跨平台操作问题,区块链技术便无法在银行业发挥最大应用价值。

RippleNet’s core value when it comes to cross-border payments is its “certainty”. With DLT, transactions have a pre-validation step and are instantaneous at both locations, thus providing high certainty and faster deliver for clients.

SWIFT is no longer slow nowadays, with the introduction of SWIFT GPI. However, the technology deployed by Ripple has the potential for a great and bright future for the banking system.

But currently banks are having difficulties reaping the full benefits from the use of DLT. Unlike SWIFT’s international payments where there is standardisation on the data that accompanies the payment,there is currently no such standardisation used across the whole industry.

01

RippleNet的核心价值是“可靠性” 而非“低成本”

金融界:请问区块链技术在银行业的应用是否可以脱离“加密货币”这个概念来发展?渣打采用Ripple技术后节省了多少成本?

Shirish Wadivkar:首先要明确一个非常重要的价值判断,RippleNet是银行为提供稳健的国际支付服务而创建的软件,“为客户服务”才是我们唯一的宗旨。当前企业间大部分国际支付仍采用法定货币。客户的生态系统和供应链所采用的货币才是银行进行货币交易的主要动力。所以,渣打银行在开展相关试点项目时,并没有使用加密货币。事实上,Ripple公司确实也为纯法币交易环境也提供了相应的解决方案,并非一定要使用加密货币才能开展交易。

区块链可用于解决贸易融资和国际支付方面的实际问题,这一点已毋庸置疑。但渣打采用RippleNet并非为了“节约成本”,我们看重的是该技术的“可靠性”。因为RippleNet采用的分布式账本技术有“预验证”步骤,可以实现转账人与收款人双方信息同步,从而保证“到账即看到”,避免出现传统银行因系统原因引致的“到账却不及时显示”等问题。对于客户而言,RippleNet的转账服务可靠性更高、速度更快。

金融界:许多采用区块链技术的商业银行、投资银行和资产管理公司等金融机构的管理层认为,金融机构更倾向于使用世界流通的储备货币进行结算,而非瑞波币。可见,对渣打而言,投资瑞波核更多是看中其底层分布式账本技术,对吗?

Shirish Wadivkar:是的,渣打银行看重的是加密货币背后的分布式账本技术。通过RippleNet技术,我们可以提高国际支付的效率和可靠性,并实现国际支付的实时可追踪。Ripple技术极大降低了失败的风险,并且同时提供了交易双方的实时可视性。

02

SWIFT不再低效 Ripple技术面临激烈竞争

金融界:目前,SWIFT系统仍然是全球主流跨境支付系统。世界各国银行主要采用SWIFT(国际银行合作组织)系统相互汇款。但我们听说此系统效率低且费率高,这是事实吗?这是否意味着Ripple有机会逆袭?

Shirish Wadivkar:SWIFT是国际间普遍可用的转账系统,业内曾一度认为速度过慢、效率不高。其实,传统跨境转账交易速度慢主要因为各国各地银行间通讯标准不统一。

此一时彼一时,现在的SWIFT系统引入了SWIFT GPI这个新技术,极大提高了国际间转账速度,一笔交易甚至可以在几分钟甚至几秒钟内就完成。数据显示,接近50%的GPI支付在30分钟内完成交易。全球每天有接近1000亿美元通过SWIFT系统转账,能如此高效地实现巨量交易额的快速高效转账,是非常了不起的进步。

即便面临来自传统跨境支付技术的激烈竞争,以RippleNet为代表的分布式账本技术具备的“高可靠性”与“快速服务”能力在银行业依然拥有广阔的发展空间。

金融界:Ripple当前发展的最大问题是什么?

Shirish Wadivkar:区块链系统的优势和便利性有一个重要前提,就是交易双方必须同处于一个系统,只有这样才能实现系统间点对点的高效交易。但不同于已经实现标准化的SWIFT,区块链技术尚未实现数据标准统一。

虽然大多数银行都对区块链技术提供的高性能感兴趣,但大家都面临跨平台操作问题,不同的“链”之间不能互相共通。目前来看,倘若不能解决跨平台操作问题,区块链技术便无法在银行业发挥最大的应用价值。如何让尽可能多的银行接受RippleNet,是将技术商业化需要重点解决的问题。

03

理解客户更重要 区块链不一定是最好用的工具

金融界:国际结算交易通常耗时耗力,未来运用区块链技术后可以减少很多中间环节,这是否意味着传统金融人才会迎来裁员潮?未来银行最需要哪种类型的人才?

Shirish Wadivkar:综合偏向技术的人或许会更适应未来工作。区块链这类新技术的出现,无疑能够推动企业的发展。但无论采用何种技术,都是为了更好地为商业活动赋能。金融从业者最重要的能力依然是“理解客户需求”,并基于“客户利益最大化”原则提供解决方案。

今天讨论的“高效可靠的转账服务”这类创新最容易成功,因为这种创新最容易商业化。我们不应该把区块链技术看作一把闪亮的新锤子,凭空幻想应用场景,然后拿着它去寻找钉子。相反,我们应该关注“真正”的问题,然后选择最合适的技术方案来解决,区块链不一定是最好用的工具。

金融界:目前,许多国际标准化组织如国际标准化组织(ISO)、国际电信联盟(ITU)、和万维网联盟(W3C)都已经开始着手区块链标准化相关工作。中国相关部委科研单位也有所行动。您认为什么样的共识可以协调行业利益相关者,应该由政府通过行政命令的方式设置标准?还是让市场定义标准?

Shirish Wadivkar:高新技术发展到一定发展阶段,往往会遇到“标准化”问题。届时,商业机构以及众多利益相关方(包括政府在内的监管机构)在各自利益驱使下会共同推动行业标准化进程。

01

Using Technology without Cryptocurrency Ripple’s Core Value is “certainty”

JRJC: Can the current application of blockchain technology in the banking sector develop without cryptocurrency? How much cost has been reduced when adopting RippleNet?

Shirish Wadivkar:Ripple is the software – the payment scheme that is created by banks around that to provide robust payment processes and structure is called RippleNet – that is the value proposition.

Having demonstrated Ripple’s applicability in solving real client problems in trade finance and international payments, Standard Chartered conducted several pilots using this technology but without the use of its cryptocurrency (XRP). Ripple offers a product option where transactions use only fiat currency.

As an international trade bank,our role and commitment is to support our clients in facilitating global trade and commerce and provide them with best-in-class service and solutions to do so. While the growth of cryptocurrencies has recently been making headlines, all of our payments between businesses today continue to be transacted in fiat currencies – currency of our clients’ ecosystem and their supply chains hence will remain the primary driver for any bank to deal in any currency.

This service was not launched with an objective of cost savings however the focus was “certainty” in cross border payments using a DLT layer to pre-certify and commit payment transactions across the connected banks in a seamless and irrefutable manner.

JRJC: Blockchain management of financial institutions such as many commercial banks, investment banks, and asset management companies believe that financial institutions prefer to use the world's reserve currency for settlement instead of cryptocurrency. So the reason why Standard Chartered invests in Ripple lies in its underlying distributed ledger technology, right?

Shirish Wadivkar: Yes, we have always maintained that the technology behind cryptocurrencies and block chains – Distributed Ledger technology (DLT) has been our core interest and via RippleNet we use it to drive traceability, visibility and certainty in international payments made in real-time. Ripple’s technology minimizes the risk of failure and deliver and offers end-to-end visibility into every payment by exchanging transaction and fee information before payments are executed.


02

SWIFT is no Longer Slow Ripple Faces Fierce Competition

JRJC: Can you compare Ripple with SWIFT system? At present, banks in various countries use the SWIFT (International Banking Cooperative Organization) system to transfer money to each other. I heard that the overall efficiency is low, and the rates are high, sometimes up to 40%. And It usually takes 3 to 5 days to arrive. Is that true?

Shirish Wadivkar: As a stable, robust and universally available secure messaging system, SWIFT is perceived to be slow. The traditional way of cross-border payments using SWIFT ended up being “slower” because the numerous hand-offs between banks, their correspondents and use of the respective clearing systems in each country.

But things have changed with the introduction of the SWIFT GPI. Transfers have been much faster, even have it done in minutes or even seconds. Data shows that nearly 50% of GPI payments are credited to end beneficiaries within 30 minutes, and almost 100% of GPI payments are credited within 24 hours, considering the amount and volume that is being transferred in this system, (100 billion USD per day) this increase in speed of payments brings real benefit to a lot of users.

JRJC: What is the biggest problem for Ripple’s current development?

Shirish Wadivkar: Ripple’s advantage and convenience are based on the fact that the point to point transaction must be conduct between banks on the Ripple technology network, and that is not the scenario for the current banking system.

The Cross-chain problem is the real problem Ripple is facing right now. For most of the banks looking to new technology to improve the speed of their international transfers, being on the same ledger is a prerequisite to be able to benefit from using DLT technology. But currently the banks are having difficulties reaping the full benefits from the use of DLT.

In addition, unlike the SWIFT international payments where there is standardization on the data that accompanies the payment, there is currently no such standardization used across the whole industry.

However, with major banks showing tremendous willingness to use the Ripple payment protocol for their own internal transfers and dealings with other banks we believe that there is no version of a future payments platform without incorporating elements of DLT.


03

Focused on the “Real” Problems Understanding Client Issues Matters Most

JRJC: International transaction settlements usually takes time and efforts, and blockchain tech reduce a lot of intermediate process, does this mean an job cut in tradition financial talents. What kind of talent people are required in the future under the blockchain environment.

Shirish Wadivkar: Technology, including blockchain/DLT are enablers for businesses. What is important for banks to have the ability to understand our client issues and championing solutions in the best interests of our clients. We should innovate to create solutions that best fit our clients’ needs and such innovation is consequently most easy to commercialise – the reason we should invest in any solution in the 1st place, the ability to commercialise it.

We should not be looking at technology as a shiny new hammer seeking nails. Instead, we should be focused on the “real” problems that exist and seeing if blockchain is the right tool, amongst many more at our disposal today and in the future.

JRJC: At present, international standardization bodies such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) have started standardization of blockchains. The Department of Information and Software Services of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of the People's Republic of China has also started a special study on the preparation of the National Blockchain and Distributed Accounting Technology Standardization Technical Committee recently. What consensus needs to be reached among industry stakeholders to implement the industry standardization? Is the blockchain industry standard controlled by administrative orders? Or maybe the power of the market matters more?

Shirish Wadivkar: We shouldn’t question the principles on why standardization is required, and as such these will remain the same regardless of what technology is envisaged to be used at the underlying. The universality and multi-party nature of commerce (regulators and governments included) will drive the use cases on standardization. This will come to use cases where DLT is truly useful too and always as a combination of market forces and multilateral standards bodies.

往期回顾