Marcin Kolasa, Gurnain Kaur Pasricha, Mr. Suman S Basu, Ms. Emine Boz, and Dimitre Milkov
Insights from the IPF workstream can help guide the appropriate policy mix during an inflow surge, based on the shock and country characteristics. Inflow surges may be caused by a range of shocks and can take different forms in different countries. The IPF models suggest that warranted macroeconomic policy adjustments depend on the nature of the shock and country characteristics. The IPF models point to shocks and country characteristics that make it difficult to effectively respond to surges using only macroeconomic policy and exchange rate adjustment. The IPF models also suggest that, in the presence of overheating and overvaluation, the use of FXI and CFMs can enhance monetary autonomy in certain circumstances without generating other distortions. The relative costs and benefits of FXI and CFMs depend on country-specific factors. The IPF models also illustrate how surges can lead to a build-up of systemic financial risks. The IPF workstream connects the appropriate mix of MPMs and CFM/MPMs to the structure of the country's financial system.
The actions in this document aim at • Bringing the Fund’s framework for advice on capital flow policies up to date with recent research and lessons from experience. • Enhancing and coordinating a Fund-wide research • Ramping up the monitoring and analysis of capital flows. • Strengthening multilateral cooperation on policy issues affecting capital flows.
Policymakers often face difficult tradeoffs in pursuing domestic and external stabilization objectives. The paper reflects staff’s work to advance the understanding of the policy options and tradeoffs available to policymakers in a systematic and analytical way. The paper recognizes that the optimal path of the IPF tools depends on structural characteristics and fiscal policies. The operational implications of IPF findings require careful consideration. Developing safeguards to minimize the risk of inappropriate use of IPF policies will be essential. Staff remains guided by the Fund’s Institutional View (IV) on the Liberalization and Management of Capital Flows.
As noted in the report, the adoption of the IV represented a major advance in the IMF’s policy framework to provide advice on capital account liberalization and the management of capital flows. Before the adoption of the IV, there was no consistent framework to guide policy advice on these areas. The IV was a major step towards filling the gap existing at the time. It welcomed the economic benefits of capital flows while recognizing the risks associated with capital flow volatility, developed a playbook for safe capital account liberalization, and incorporated capital flow management measures (CFMs) into the policy toolkit. It also noted the importance of international cooperation on capital flow policies in allowing countries to harness the benefits of capital flows safely, while minimizing negative spillovers. It was a demonstration of the institution’s flexibility and willingness to embrace theoretical advances and lessons from experience.
International cooperation, economic and financial integration, and technological progress have delivered enormous benefits across the globe during the past decades. Yet, in many countries, these benefits have not been shared adequately to prevent eroding trust in institutions and weakening support for the global system that has made these gains possible.
Ms. Katrin Elborgh-Woytek and Mr. Julian Berengaut
The paper analyzes the initial output decline in transition economies by estimating a crosssection model stressing two major factors-conflicts and the legacies of the Soviet period. We link the Soviet legacies in place at the outset of the transition to the subsequent path for the development of market-related institutions. Institutional development (as proxied by measures of corruption) is used as an intermediate variable. An instrumental variable approach is followed to derive estimates that are not biased by the possible endogeneity of corruption with respect to output developments. Assuming that the extent of Soviet legacies was positively correlated with the length of the communist rule allows us to use the years under the Soviet regime as an instrument.