This issue of the IMF Research Bulletin opens with a letter from the new editor, Rabah Arezki. The Research Summaries are a "Primer on 'Global Liquidity'" (Eugenio Cerutti, Stijn Claessens, and Lev Ratnovski); and "Trade Integration adn Business Cycle Synchronization" (Kevin Cheng, Romain Duval, and Dulani Senevirante). The Q&A column looks at "Seven Questions on the Global Housing Markets" (Hites Ahir, Heedon Kang, and Prakash Loungani). September 2014 issue of the Bulletin also includes updates on IMF Working Papers, Staff Discussion Notes, and Recommended Readings from the IMF Bookstore, as well as special announcements on new staff publications and the Fifteenth Annual Jacques Polak Research Conference. Also included is information on the latest issue of �IMF Economic Review� with a link to an article by Paul Krugman.
The research summaries in the September 2012 issue of the IMF Research Bulletin are "Surges in Capital Flows: Why History Repeats Itself" (by Mahvash S. Qureshi) and "The LIC-BRIC Linkage: Growth Spillovers" (by Issouf Samake, Yongzheng Yang, and Catherine Pattillo). The Q&A covers "Seven Questions on Monetary Transmission in Low-Income Countries" (by Prachi Mishra and Peter Montiel). "Conversations with a Visiting Scholar" features an interview with IMF Fellow Olivier Coibion. Also included in this issue are details on the IMF Fellowship Program, visiting scholars at the IMF, a listing of recently published IMF Working Papers and Staff Discussion Notes, and an announcement on IMF Economic Review's first Impact Factor.
The size of the U.S. economy and, in particular, the global dominance of its financial markets creates uniquely large policy spillovers. Concerns that the end of QE2 could lead to a rapid reversal of emerging market capital flows appear overblown. A credible plan for a gradual U.S. fiscal consolidation would likely have limited short-term spillovers and substantial longer-term benefits. Overall, U.S. and foreign goals appear better aligned for U.S. fiscal and financial policies than for monetary policies. Fiscal consolidation and sounder financial regulation will help.
The spillovers from the U.S. economy to Canada have been assessed. It uses structural vector autoregressions to analyze the role of financial linkages in real and financial spillovers from the United States to Canada. The implications of Canada’s predictable price level have been analyzed. Innovative small and medium-size enterprises have significantly greater difficulty in obtaining financing, reflecting reluctance by the banks to price risk. Canada has sufficiently flexible labor markets to absorb significant sectoral shocks without creating a high level of frictional unemployment.
Carlos Caceres, Mr. Yan Carriere-Swallow, Ishak Demir, and Bertrand Gruss
As the Federal Reserve continues to normalize its monetary policy, this paper studies the impact
of U.S. interest rates on rates in other countries. We find a modest but nontrivial pass-through
from U.S. to domestic short-term interest rates on average. We show that, to a large extent, this comovement
reflects synchronized business cycles. However, there is important heterogeneity across
countries, and we find evidence of limited monetary autonomy in some cases. The co-movement
of longer term interest rates is larger and more pervasive. We distinguish between U.S. interest
rate movements that surprise markets versus those that are anticipated, and find that most
countries receive greater spillovers from the former. We also distinguish between movements in
the U.S. term premium and the expected path of risk-free rates, concluding that countries respond
differently to these shocks. Finally, we explore the determinants of monetary autonomy and find
strong evidence for the role of exchange rate flexibility, capital account openness, but also for
other factors, such as dollarization of financial system liabilities, and the credibility of fiscal and
The unconventional monetary policies (UMPs) pursued by the advanced economies (AEs) have posed macroeconomic challenges for the emerging market economies (EMEs) through volatile capital flows and exchange rates. AE central banks need to acknowledge and appreciate the spillovers resulting from such UMPs. Central banks of the AEs, who have set up standing mutual swap facilities, should explore similar arrangements with other significant EMEs with appropriate risk mitigation measures. These initiatives could do much to actually curb volatility in global financial markets and hence in capital flows to EMEs, thus obviating the need for defensive policy actions on the part of EMEs.
Abstract What do climate change, global financial crises, pandemics, and fragility and conflict have in common? They are all examples of global risks that can cross geographical and generational boundaries and whose mismanagement can reverse gains in development and jeopardize the well-being of generations. Managing risks such as these becomes a global public good, whose benefits also cross boundaries, providing a rationale for collective action facilitated by the international community. Yet, as many public goods, provision of global public goods suffer from collective action failures that undermine international coordination. This paper discusses the obstacles to addresing these global risks effectively, highlighting their implications for the current juncture. It claims that remaining gaps in information, resources, and capacity hamper accumulation and use of knowledge to triger appropriate action, but diverging national interests remain the key impediment to cooperation and effectiveness of global efforts, even when knowledge on the risks and their consequences are well understood. The paper argues that managing global risks requires a cohesive international community that enables its stakeholders to work collectively around common goals by facilitating sharing of knowledge, devoting resources to capacity building, and protecting the vulnerable. When some countries fail to cooperate, the international community can still forge cooperation, including by realigning incentives and demonstrating benefit from incremental steps toward full cooperation.
This paper defines financial market spillovers as the comovement between two countries’ financial markets and analyzes financial market spillovers over the period 2001-12 through four channels: bilateral portfolio investment, bilateral trade, home bias, and country concentration. The paper finds that, if a country has a large amount of bilateral portfolio exposure in another country, these two countries’ comovement of bond yields are large. Also, countries’ geographical preferences impact financial spillovers; if a country has a stronger home bias, the country could have less spillovers from foreign financial markets. A policy implication from this result is that, if countries become less home-biased and have a greater amount of portfolio investment assets, they should strengthen prudential regulations to mitigate against rising risks of financial spillovers (or risk greater volatility owing to comovement with foreign markets).
The financial crisis, originated from the collapse of US housing markets in 2008, reverberates around the world. Its destructive force was felt nowhere more keenly than Western Europe. Indeed, it continues to mire in financial volatility as the debt problem contagiously spreads around the periphery Euro area. Taking a wider historical view of the evolution over the recent decades of the North Atlantic economy, comprising North America and Western Europe, we argue that while trade links were in relative stasis, the increasing and uniquely-close Transatlantic financial relationship was a crucial conduit in transmitting US shocks into global ones.