Front Matter
Author:
International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office
Search for other papers by International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Abstract

This report updates the 2009 IEO evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues. Since then, the composition and structure of international trade have evolved, but trade has not regained its former dynamism. With increasing concern about potential winners and losers from trade, there has been a loss of political support for globalization, increasing trade tensions and protectionism, and the institutional framework supporting multilateral trade has come under heavy strain. The report concludes that overall the IMF deserves considerable credit for its active and timely response, playing a prominent role in championing commitment to an open, rules-based multilateral trading system. The Fund has largely implemented the recommendations of the 2009 evaluation and has strengthened and consolidated its trade policy analysis and advice, appropriately focusing on the key macroeconomic effects and associated risks of trade policy developments at the national and international levels. IMF advocacy on trade has been underpinned by a major expansion in the attention to trade policy issues in multilateral surveillance—and to some extent in bilateral surveillance—supported by high-quality research and analysis, building on the Fund’s well-established modeling capacity. Looking forward, the Fund will need to sustain its current high level of advocacy and analysis on trade policy issues and consider how to increase the overall impact of this work. Key challenges include: contributing to foster a recommitment to trade policy cooperation; further attention to translating multilateral surveillance into bilateral policy advice; consolidating relations with partner institutions; and increased attention to rapidly developing trade policy issues. Across all these dimensions, care will be needed to ensure appropriate evenhandedness in trade policy surveillance across countries. A holistic review of the IMF’s “trade strategy” would help to guide trade policy work and the allocation of scarce resources among competing priorities.

IEO

Independent Evaluation Office

of the International Monetary Fund

IMF INVOLVEMENT IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLICY ISSUES

EVALUATION UPDATE 2019

ABOUT THE IEO

Established in 2001, the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of the IMF conducts independent and objective evaluations of the IMF’s policies, activities, and products. In accordance with its terms of reference, it pursues three interrelated objectives:

  • ► To support the Executive Board’s institutional governance and oversight responsibilities by contributing to accountability.

  • ► To enhance the learning culture within the Fund by increasing the ability to draw lessons and integrate improvements.

  • ► To strengthen the Fund’s external credibility through enhanced transparency.

For further information on the IEO and its ongoing and completed evaluations, please see IEO.IMF.org or contact the IEO at +1 202.623.7312 or at IEO@IMF.org.

This report is the tenth in an IEO series that revisits past evaluations. Reports in this series aim to determine whether the main findings and conclusions of the original IEO evaluation remain relevant, and to identify any outstanding or new issues related to the evaluation topic that merit continued attention. These assessments do not provide recommendations and are typically based on desk reviews of IMF documents and interviews of IMF staff and members of the Executive Board. This report reviews the 2009 IEO evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues.

IEO

Independent Evaluation Office

of the International Monetary Fund

IMF INVOLVEMENT IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLICY ISSUES

EVALUATION UPDATE 2019

©2019 International Monetary Fund

CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

IMF LIBRARY

Names: Casas, Miguel de Las, author. | Rustomjee, Cyrus, author. | Chen, Yishu, author. | Kwang Yeon Lee, author. | International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office, issuing body. | International Monetary Fund, publisher.

Title: IMF involvement in international trade policy issues : evaluation update 2019 / [prepared by Miguel de Las Casas and Cyrus Rustomjee, with contributions from Yishu Chen and Kwang Yeon Lee].

Other titles: Evaluation report (International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office).

Description: Washington, DC : International Monetary Fund, 2019. | Evaluation report. | Includes bibliographical references.

Identifiers: ISBN 9781513522203 (paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Commercial policy. | Commercial policy—International cooperation. | International trade. | International Monetary Fund—Evaluation..

Classification: LCC HF1411.I44 2019

Publication orders may be placed online, by fax, or through the mail:

International Monetary Fund, Publication Services

P.O. Box 92780, Washington, DC 20090, U.S.A.

Tel: +(1) 202.623.7430 | Fax: +(1) 202.623.7201

E-mail: publications@imf.org

imfbookstore.org

elibrary.imf.org

Contents

  • FOREWORD

  • CONTRIBUTORS

  • ABBREVIATIONS

  • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  • 1. INTRODUCTION

  • 2. THE 2009 EVALUATION: KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

  • 3. INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND TRADE POLICY ISSUES: A DECADE OF CHANGE

  • 4. TEN YEARS OF IMF TRADE-RELATED WORK: AN ASSESSMENT

    • Mandate and Guidance

    • Trade Policy Issues in Surveillance

    • Trade Issues in Other Fund Activities

    • Communications and Advocacy

    • Relations with Partners

    • Institutional Issues

  • 5. CONCLUSIONS, CHALLENGES, AND OPPORTUNITIES

  • BOXES

    • 1. Summary of Recommendations of the 2009 Evaluation

    • 2. IMF Work on Trade in the G20 Context

  • FIGURES

    • 1. International Trade Policy: Timeline of Selected External Events, 2000–19

    • 2. World Economic Outlook Reports: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues, 2000–19

    • 3. Regional Economic Outlook Reports: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues, 2004–19

    • 4. Attention to Trade Policy in Article IV Reports, 2010–19

    • 5. Trade Policy Issues in Article IV Reports, 2010–19

    • 6. Article IV Reports: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues, 2000–19

    • 7. Selected Issues Papers: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues, 2000–19

    • 8. Working Papers by Authoring Department, 2000–19

    • 9. Working Papers: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues, 2000–19

    • 10. Managing Director’s Speeches and Global Policy Agendas: Text Analysis of Trade Policy Issues

  • ANNEXES

    • 1. Recommendations, Executive Board Response, and Proposed Follow-Up.

    • 2. Compendium of Selected IMF Work on Trade Policy Surveillance

    • 3. Underpinnings for the Fund’s Work on Trade in the Articles of Agreement

    • 4. Trade Policy Text Analysis

  • REFERENCES

  • STATEMENT BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

The following conventions are used in this publication:

  • ► An en dash (–) between years or months (for example, 2017–18 or January–June) indicates the years or months covered, including the beginning and ending years or months; a slash or virgule (/) between years or months (for example, 2017/18) indicates a fiscal or financial year, as does the abbreviation FY (for example, FY2018).

  • ► “Billion” means a thousand million; “trillion” means a thousand billion.

Some of the documents cited and referenced in this report were not available to the public at the time of publication of this report. Under the current policy on public access to the IMF’s archives, some of these documents will become available three or five years after their issuance. They may be referenced as EBS/YY/NN and SM/YY/NN, where EBS and SM indicate the series and YY indicates the year of issue. Certain other types of documents may become available 20 years after their issuance. For further information, see www.imf.org/external/np/arc/eng/archive.htm.

As used in this evaluation report, the terms “country” and “state” do not in all cases refer to a territorial entity that is a state as understood by international law and practice.

Foreword

In recent years, trade issues have been high on the global economic policy agenda amid a loss of political support for multilateral trade liberalization, increasing trade tensions and a rise in protectionist measures. This update of the IEO’s 2009 evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues finds that the IMF has responded impressively to these challenges and has played a prominent role in championing a continued commitment to an open, rules-based multilateral trading system. The Fund’s attention to trade policy issues has expanded significantly in bilateral and particularly multilateral surveillance, notably for countries with the largest shares of global trade. The Fund has sought to maximize its impact and influence on trade issues by working closely with partner institutions, building on its technical expertise in modelling the global impact of trade-related uncertainty and its platform for high-level advocacy.

The global trade environment remains under heavy stress and it is uncertain how the current trade tensions will be resolved. The Fund will therefore need to sustain its efforts on the trade policy front and consider how to increase the overall impact of this work, particularly since the next few years could be crucial to preserve an open, rules-based system.

Among key challenges for the Fund, the report emphasizes contributing to efforts to foster a recommitment to trade policy cooperation consistent with a healthy global economy; further efforts to translate multilateral surveillance into bilateral policy advice, particularly outside the largest trading economies; consolidating close cooperation with other institutions; and devoting more attention to rapidly developing issues such as the macroeconomic implications of digitization and e-commerce and the linkage between trade policies and migration issues.

I am pleased that the Managing Director, in her response to our update, has shared our overall assessment of the IMF’s trade work and concurs that the remaining challenges need continued attention and collective commitment.

Charles Collyns

Director, Independent Evaluation Office

Contributors

This report was prepared by Miguel de Las Casas and Cyrus Rustomjee, with contributions from Yishu Chen and Kwang Yeon Lee. Arun Bhatnagar provided administrative assistance, and Roxana Pedraglio and Esha Ray provided editorial and production management assistance.

The report was approved by Charles Collyns.

Abbreviations

AFR

African Department, IMF

APD

Asia and Pacific Department, IMF

ECF

Extended Credit Facility

EFF

Extended Fund Facility

EU

European Union

EUR

European Department, IMF

FAD

Fiscal Affairs Department, IMF

FCL

Flexible Credit Line

FTA

free trade agreement

G20

Group of Twenty

GFC

global financial crisis

GPA

Global Policy Agenda

GTS

global trade system

GVC

global value chain

IMS

international monetary system

ISD

Integrated Surveillance Decision

ITGS

international trade in goods and services

LIC

low-income country

MCD

Middle East and Central Asia Department, IMF

MD

Managing Director

MONA

Monitoring of Fund Arrangements Database

MTS

multilateral trade system

NTM

non-tariff measure

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PLL

Precautionary and Liquidity Line

PTA

Preferential Trade Agreement

PRGF

Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility

PSI

Policy Support Instrument

REO

Regional Economic Outlook

RES

Research Department, IMF

RTA

regional trade agreement

SBA

Stand-By Arrangement

SDGs

Sustainable Development Goals

SIP

Selected Issues Paper

SPR

Strategy, Policy and Review Department, IMF

SPRXP

External Policy Division of SPR, IMF

STA

Statistics Department, IMF

TIM

Trade Integration Mechanism

TPP

Trans-Pacific Partnership

UFR

use of Fund resources

UNCTAD

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

WEO

World Economic Outlook

WHD

Western Hemisphere Department, IMF

WP

Working Paper

WTO

World Trade Organization

Executive Summary

The Independent Evaluation Office completed an evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues in 2009, in the wake of the global financial crisis and a severe collapse in global trade, following decades of strong trade growth. Since then, the global economy has revived while the composition and structure of international trade have continued to evolve, responding to new technologies and opportunities, but trade has not regained its former dynamism. With increasing concern about potential winners and losers from trade, there has been a loss of political support for globalization, increasing trade tensions and a rise in protectionist measures, with the institutional framework that has underpinned multilateral trade for decades coming under heavy strain.

This update to the 2009 evaluation concludes that overall the IMF deserves considerable credit for its active and timely response to the challenges posed by these developments, as it has come to play a prominent role in championing a continued commitment to an open, rules-based multilateral trading system. The Fund has largely implemented the recommendations of the 2009 evaluation and has strengthened and consolidated its trade policy analysis and advice, particularly in recent years as stress on the trading system has mounted and posed increasing risks for macroeconomic performance. Consistent with the Fund’s mandate and comparative advantage, this work has appropriately focused on analyzing the key macroeconomic effects and associated risks of trade policy developments at the national and international levels.

IMF advocacy on trade has been underpinned by a major expansion in attention to trade policy issues in multilateral surveillance since 2015, supported by high-quality, in-depth research and analysis building on the Fund’s well-established global macroeconomic modeling capacity. After a period of relatively limited attention, coverage of trade policy issues in bilateral surveillance has also risen considerably, particularly in countries with the largest shares of global trade that have been the focus of recent trade tensions, with sharply increased analysis of outward spillover impacts from trade measures. The quality and influence of trade work have benefited from reinvigorated working relationships with partner institutions over the last four years. Internally, the Fund’s organizational structure and resources devoted to trade, while stretched thin, have generally sufficed, although research on some emerging trade policy issues has been postponed.

Notwithstanding these efforts, the global trade environment remains under heavy stress and increasingly clouds the global outlook. It is highly uncertain how the current trade tensions will be resolved and how governance of the multilateral trade system will evolve. Moreover, technological innovation and the rise of services will imply continued rapid evolution of trade patterns and increase the complexity of trade policies further. Tus, the Fund will need to sustain its current high level of advocacy and analysis on trade policy issues and consider how to increase the overall impact of this work, particularly since the next few years could be crucial to preserve an open, rules-based, multilateral system.

Key challenges for the IMF include: contributing to efforts to foster a recommitment to workable approaches for trade policy cooperation consistent with a healthy global economy; further attention to translation of multilateral surveillance into bilateral policy advice, particularly outside the largest trading economies; consolidating relations with partner institutions while mitigating key-person risk; and paying more attention to rapidly developing issues such as the macroeconomic implications of digitization and e-commerce and the linkage between trade policies and migration issues. Across all these dimensions, care will be needed to ensure appropriate evenhandedness in trade policy surveillance across countries.

Given these challenges, the continuing value-added and coherence of the IMF’s work on trade policies could benefit from a holistic review of the IMF’s “trade strategy” for discussion by the Executive Board, which would consider the Fund’s role, objectives, and priorities for trade work in the evolving global context. Such an assessment would help to guide staff work and the appropriate allocation of scarce resources to trade policy issues among competing priorities. The upcoming five-yearly trade policy review, anticipated for 2020, provides a timely opportunity for this purpose.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues
  • Abrego, Lisandro, and others, 2019, “The African Continental Free Trade Agreement: Welfare Gains Estimates from a General Equilibrium Model,” IMF Working Paper No. 19/124 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ahn, JaeBin, and others, 2016, “Reassessing the Productivity Gains from Trade Liberalization,” IMF Working Paper No. 16/77 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Aiyar, Shekhar, and others, 2013, “German-Central European Supply Chain Cluster Report,” Country Report 13/263 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Aslam, Aqib, Natalija Novta, and Fabiano Rodrigues-Bastos, 2017, “Calculating Trade in Value-Added,” IMF Working Paper No. 17/178 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Arizala, Francisco, and others, 2019, “Regional Growth Spillovers in Sub-Saharan Africa,” IMF Working Paper No. 19/160 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Autor, David H., 2013, “The ‘Task Approach’ to Labor Markets: An Overview,” Journal for Labour Market Research, February, pp. 115.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Autor, David H., 2018, “Trade and labor markets: Lessons from China’s rise,” IZA World of Labor, February.

  • Boz, Emine, Gita Gopinath, and Mikkel Plagborg-Møller, 2018, “Global Trade and the Dollar,” VOX, CEPR Policy Portal (Washington: Center for Economic and Policy Research).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boz, Emine, Nan Li, and Hongrui Zhang, 2019, “Effective Trade Costs and the Current Account: An Empirical Analysis,” IMF Working Paper No. 19/8 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cerdeiro, Diego A., 2016, “Estimating the Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) on Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC),” IMF Working Paper No. 16/101 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cerdeiro, Diego A., and Rachel J. Nam, 2018, “A Multidimensional Approach to Trade Policy Indicators,” IMF Working Paper No. 18/32 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dabla-Norris, Era, and others, 2015, “Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective,” IMF Staff Discussion Note 15/13 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dao, Mai Chi, and others, 2017, “Why Is Labor Receiving a Smaller Share of Global Income? Theory and Empirical Evidence,” IMF Working Paper No. 17/169 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • De Backer, Koen, and Dorothee Flaig, 2017, “The future of global value chains: Business as usual or “a new normal”?OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 41 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dollar, David, 2019, “Invisible links: Value chains transform manufacturing—and distort the globalization debate,” Finance and Development, Vol. 56, No. 2 (June), pp. 5053.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ebeke, Christian, and others, 2018, “Trade Uncertainty and Investment in the Euro Area,” IMF Working Paper No. 18/281 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Furceri, Davide, and others, 2019, “Macroeconomic Consequences of Tariffs,” IMF Working Paper No. 19/9 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gopinath, Gita, and others, 2018, “Dominant Currency Paradigm,” CREI Lectures in Macroeconomics 2018 (Barccelona: Centre de Recerca en Economia Internacional).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gregory, Rob, and others, 2010, “Trade and the Crisis: Protect or Recover,” IMF Staff Position Note 10/07 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gruss, Bertrand, Malhar Nabar, and Marcos Poplawski-Ribeiro, 2018, “Growth Accelerations and Reversals in Emerging Market and Developing Economies: The Role of External Conditions,” IMF Working Paper No. 18/52 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Henn, Christian, Chris Papageorgiou, and Nikola Spatafora, 2013, “Export Quality in Developing Countries,” IMF Working Paper No. 13/108 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Huidrom, Raju, and others, 2019, “Trade Tensions, Global Value Chains and Spillovers: Insights for Europe,” Departmental Paper 19/10 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ignatenko, Anna, Faezeh Raei, and Borislava Mircheva, 2019, “Global Value Chains: What are the Benefits and Why Do Countries Participate?IMF Working Paper No. 19/18 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund (IEO), 2009, IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund (IEO), 2018, Structural Conditionality in IMF-Supported Programs: Evaluation Update (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 1996, “Agreement between the IMF and the WTO” (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2001, “Structural Conditionality in Fund-Supported Programs,” February (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2002, “Operational Guidance Note for Staff Following the 2002 Biennial Surveillance Review,” September (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2009, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the IEO Evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues,” November (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2010a, “Reference Note on Trade in Financial Services,” IMF Policy Paper, September (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2010b, “Reference Note on Trade Policy, Preferential Trade Agreements, and WTO Consistency,” October (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2011, “The WTO Doha Trade Round—Unlocking the Negotiations and Beyond,” IMF Policy Paper, November (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2012, “Decision on Bilateral and Multilateral Surveillance,” Decision No. 15203-(12/72), July, Selected Decisions and Selected Documents of the IMF, Thirty-Ninth Issue (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2013a, “Jobs and Growth: Analytical and Operational Considerations for the Fund,” March (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2013b, “Guidance Note on ‘Jobs and Growth Issues in Surveillance and Program Work,’September (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2014, “Review of the IMF’s Communications Strategy,” June (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2015a, “Review of the Role of Trade in the Work of the Fund” (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2015b, “The Chairman’s Summing Up—Review of the Role of Trade in the Work of the Fund,” Executive Board Meeting 15/21, February (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2016, “Group of Twenty—Reinvigorating Trade to Support Growth: A Path Forward,” May (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2018a, “2018 External Sector Report: Tackling Global Imbalances amid Rising Trade Tensions,” July (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2018b, “Regional Economic Outlook: Western Hemisphere Region—An Uneven Recovery,” October (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2018c, “Regional Economic Outlook: Asia Pacific—Asia at the Forefront: Growth Challenges for the Next Decade and Beyond,” October (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2019a, “2019 External Sector Report: Te Dynamics of External Adjustment,” July (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2019b, Sub-Saharan Africa Regional Economic Outlook: Recovery Amid Elevated Uncertainty, April (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and World Trade Organization, 2017, “Making Trade an Engine of Growth for All: The Case of Trade and for Policies to Facilitate Adjustment,” for discussion at the meeting of G20 Sherpas, March (Frankfurt).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund, 2018, “Reinvigorating Trade and Inclusive Growth,” February (Washington).

  • Jaumotte, Florence, Subir Lall, and Chris Papageorgiou, 2013, “Rising Income Inequality: Technology, or Trade and Financial Globalization & Quest,” IMF Economic Review, Vol. 61, Issue 2, pp. 271309.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Johns, Bartley, and others, 2015, “The Role of Trade in Ending Poverty,” (Geneva: World Trade Organization).

  • Lagarde, Christine, 2015, “Reinvigorate Trade to Boost Global Economic Growth,” Address at the U.S. Ex-Im Bank Conference, April (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lagarde, Christine, 2018, “New Economic Landscape, New Multilateralism,” Address at the meeting of the IMF Board of Governors, October (Bali).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lang, Valentin F., and Marina Mendes Tavares, “The Distribution of Gains from Globalization,” IMF Working Paper No. 18/54 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lee, Dongyeol, and Huan Zhang, 2019, “Export Diversification in Low-Income Countries and Small States: Do Country Size and Income Level Matter?IMF Working Paper No. 19/118 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Loungani, Prakash, and others, 2017, “World Trade in Services: Evidence from a New Dataset,” IMF Working Paper No. 12/77 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKinsey Global Institute, 2014, “Global flows in a digital age: How trade, finance, people, and data connect the world economy.”

  • Milanovic, Branko, 2013, “Global Income Inequality in Numbers: in History and Now,” Global Policy, Vol. 4, Issue 2, pp. 198208.

  • Montagnat-Rentier, Gilles, 2019, “Revenue Administration: Short-Term Measures to Increase Customs Revenue in Low-Income and Fragile Countries,” Technical Notes and Manuals, Fiscal Affairs Department (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ostry, Jonathan D., Prakash Loungani, and Andrew Berg, 2019, Confronting Inequality: How Societies Can Choose Inclusive Growth (New York: Columbia University Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Payosova, Tetyana, Gary C. Hufauer, and Jeffrey J. Schott, 2018, “The Dispute Settlement Crisis in the World Trade Organization: Causes and Cures,” PIIE Policy Brief (Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rahman, Jesmin, and Tianli Zhao, 2013, “Export Performance in Europe: What Do We Know from Supply Links?IMF Working Paper No. 13/62 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shin, Hyun Song, 2019, What is behind the recent slowdown,” at the “Public Finance Dialogue” workshop arranged by German Federal Ministry of Finance and Centre for European Economic Research, May (Berlin: Bank for International Settlements).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Wersch, Cornelia Lotte, 2019, “Statistical Coverage of Trade Finance—Fintechs and Supply Chain Financing,” IMF Working Paper No. 19/165 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • World Trade Organization, 2010, Annual Report 2010 (Geneva: World Trade Organization).