đź’ˇ What Happened and Why It Matters
The 2016 Indian demonetization instantly rendered 86% of cash in circulation illegal tender, with new notes introduced gradually over the following months. A model is presented in which agents hold cash both to meet a cash-in-advance constraint and to facilitate tax evasion; the model generates testable predictions about the real and financial effects of a sudden cash shortage.
đź“Š How Causal Effects Are Identified and Measured
The event is analyzed as a large-scale natural experiment using cross-sectional variation across Indian districts. Identification relies on the geographic distribution of demonetized notes and the staggered rollout of new notes. Multiple novel data sources are combined to measure real and financial activity:
- Night lights and employment surveys to capture economic activity, including in the informal sector
- Debit/credit card and e-wallet transaction data to track payment technology adoption
- Banking data on deposits and credit growth to observe financial responses
🔎 Key Findings
- Districts that faced more severe demonetization experienced relative reductions in economic activity.
- These districts showed faster adoption of alternative payment technologies (cards and e-wallets).
- Bank credit growth was lower in areas hit harder by the cash shortage.
Taken together, the cross-sectional responses cumulate to a measurable aggregate effect in 2016Q4: a contraction of at least 2 percentage points in employment and night-lights–based output attributable to the cash shortage, and a roughly 2 percentage point reduction in bank credit relative to counterfactual paths. The estimated effects dissipate over the subsequent months.
⚖️ Broader Implication
The analysis rejects monetary neutrality in this large-scale natural experiment, providing rare causal evidence that a sudden contraction in usable cash can have short-run real effects on output, employment, payment technology adoption, and bank credit.
