Uruguay experienced one of its biggest economic booms in history during 2004-2014. Since then, growth has come down significantly. The paper investigates the various causes of the boom and discusses the sustainability of these causes. It then compares Uruguay against high-growth countries that were once at a similar income level, across a broad set of structural indicators, to identify priority reform areas that could improve long-term growth prospect.
Export structure is less diversified in low-income countries (LICs) and especially small states that face resource constraints and small economic size. This paper explores the potential linkages between export structure and economic growth and its volatility in LICs and small states, using a range of indices of export concentration differing in the coverage of industries. The empirical analysis finds that export diversification may promote economic growth and reduce economic volatility in these countries. Furthermore, the analysis demonstrates that the economic benefits of export diversification differ by country size and income level—there are bigger benefits for relatively larger and poorer countries within the group of LICs and small states.
Manoj Atolia, Mr. Prakash Loungani, Milton Marquis, and Mr. Chris Papageorgiou
This paper takes a fresh look at the current theories of structural transformation and the role of
private and public fundamentals in the process. It summarizes some representative past and
current experiences of various countries vis-a-vis structural transformation with a focus on the
roles of manufacturing, policy, and the international environment in shaping the trajectory of
structural transformation. The salient aspects of the current debate on premature
deindustrialization and its relation to a middle-income trap are described as they relate to the
path of structural transformation. Conclusions are drawn regarding prospective future paths for
structural transformation and development policies.
Yangkyoon Byeon, Kwanghae Choi, Heenam Choi, and Jun I. Kim
Korea is facing mounting economic challenges. Productivity growth has been on a trend decline amid demographic headwinds, while the societal demand for inclusive growth has been on a steep rise. Furthermore, the government-led unbalanced growth model—which served Korea well in the past—has become less effective and politically palatable in recent years. As such, Korea needs a major paradigm shift to embark on a new sustainable and inclusive growth path. But policy response has been modest at best with no major reforms being implemented over the past two decades. We propose a paradigm shift in Korea’s economic framework, involving a simultaneous big push for greater economic freedom and stronger social protection within the parameters set by long-run fiscal sustainability. We also provide a detailed account of structural reforms to boost economic freedom and sustainable funding plans for stronger social protection.
International Monetary Fund. Western Hemisphere Dept.
This 2016 Article IV Consultation highlights that the real output of Honduras in 2015 grew at 3.6 percent, slightly higher than projected. From the demand side, growth was supported by the recovery in private consumption-which responded positively to a reduction in gasoline prices and strong remittances inflows-and a boost in investment. On the supply side, the recovery in manufacturing and agriculture supported greater activity. The outlook for 2016 remains favorable. Real GDP through the second quarter of 2016 grew by 4.1 percent (year over year) broadly consistent with IMF staff projection of 3.6 percent for 2016. This projected growth performance is supported by scaled up public infrastructure investment and a supportive monetary policy stance.
Management has received a request from the Argentine authorities to publish documents on economic developments in the country prepared by Fund staff for informal Board briefings in 2013–15. The Argentine authorities see publication of these papers as part of their commitment to transparency and accountability in their operations. The documents were prepared pursuant to the Fund’s policy on excessive delays in the completion of Article IV consultations and mandatory financial stability assessments, which requires that staff informally brief Executive Directors every 12 months on the economic developments and policies of relevant members. The objectives of the policy are to promote re-engagement with members with excessively delayed consultations, and to share information with the Board to help it fulfill its surveillance function. Under current policy, the briefing documents are not published. Instead, a short factual statement is issued in a press release, noting that the Board was given an informal staff briefing on the member’s economy based on available information. Under the policy, the Fund decided against publication of the briefing documents since it was considered that publication could expose the Fund to a significant reputational risk if the analysis set out in the documents missed key vulnerabilities due to large information gaps created by the lack of consultation with the member. Also, outside audiences may not appreciate that the documents represent the views of staff, not the views of the Board, and do not constitute an Article IV consultation. A further concern was that publication could reduce the pressure on members to proceed with an Article IV consultation. In light of the current policy, any publication of these documents would require a change in policy approved by the Executive Board