Browse

You are looking at 1 - 1 of 1 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Monetary policy x
  • Financial Economics x
  • Monetary economics x
  • Financial Institutions and Services: Government Policy and Regulation x
  • Money and Monetary Policy x
  • Political Science x
  • Monetary Policy x
  • Environment Sciences x
  • Crisis management x
  • Environmental Economics x
  • South Sudan, Republic of x
  • Insurance & actuarial studies x
  • Macroeconomics x
  • Financial and monetary sector x
Clear All Modify Search
International Monetary Fund. Strategy, Policy, & Review Department
The coverage of risks has become more systematic since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC): staff reports now regularly identify major risks and provide an assessment of their likelihood and economic impact, summarized in Risk Assessment Matrices (RAM). But still limited attention is paid to the range of possible outcomes. Also, risk identification is useful only so much as to inform policy design to preemptively respond to relevant risks and/or better prepare for them. In this regard, policy recommendations in surveillance could be richer in considering various risk management approaches. To this end, progress is needed on two dimensions: • Increasing emphasis on the range of potential outcomes to improve policy design. • Encouraging more proactive policy advice on how to manage risks. Efforts should continue to leverage internal and external resources to support risk analysis and advice in surveillance.