Referencing what I wrote about chip and pin and why I suspect banks are keen to implement it:
Chip and PIN is good for the bank: it allows them to allocate blame to the customer if a card is used without the customer's permission. Here in the UK several of my friends have had their card and PIN taken and used and in most cases the banks have refused to replace the stolen funds. There are several ways a good thief can get a user's PIN without them realising but generally a careful user can keep this secret.
Chip and PIN is has been tested in the UK for the last decade and a half and I believe parts of Europe with a plan to roll it out globally eventually. The banking industry takes ages to innovate though, the chip and PIN design has been around for at least 50 years since about the mid 1960sand still has yet to make an appearance in some developed countries. See this BBC item on it from the time:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/tomorrowsworld/8012.shtml
Chip and PIN is actually quite an antiquated system that uses no form of cryptography to protect the user at the point of sale: cards can be skimmed easily as there is an unencrypted bit on the magnetic strip that tells the card reader if it's a magnetic card only or has a chip too. Meaning malicious users can replicate a card, set that bit to '0' and then sign fraudulently to make purchases. I think the rate of technology progress in the banking sector only highlights how incumbent the industry has become.