Narrow Your Choices

Refine By Countries

Refine By Series

Refine By Language

Refine By Date

—

Refine By IMF Taxonomy

Refine By JEL Taxonomy

Refine by LOC Taxonomy

Refine By THEMA Taxonomy

  • Print
  • Save

Political Science > Agriculture & Food Policy

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Economic theory and methods x
Clear All Modify Search
Cover Policy Papers
Review of Experience with The Food Shock Window Under The Rapid Financing Instrument and The Rapid Credit Facility
International Monetary Fund. Finance Dept.
,
International Monetary Fund. Legal Dept.
, and
International Monetary Fund. Strategy, Policy, & Review Department
The Food Shock Window (FSW) under the Rapid Credit Facility (RCF) and the Rapid Financing Instrument (RFI) was approved in September 2022 for 12 months, as a complement to the tools used by the Fund to support the broader international effort to address the global food shock. The Fund has been working closely with partners to provide a coordinated international response to the global food shock, and has contributed through policy advice, technical assistance and lending. Where needed and possible, financial support to countries affected by the global food shock has been delivered by the IMF through multi-year Fund-supported programs The FSW complemented this support in situations where these programs were not feasible or not necessary. As the global food shock and associated balance of payment pressures are expected to continue throughout 2023, the IMF extended the FSW until end-March 2024 to allow the FSW to continue serving as a contingency tool. This extension will also provide sufficient time to observe if the FSW can lapse without limiting the capacity of the Fund to support its members. To ensure adequate borrowing space under the emergency financing limits for those countries that have received support through the FSW, the IMF also extended the additional 25 percent of quota added to the Cumulative Access Limit until end-2026 for countries that have accessed the Food Shock Window through the RFI and until the completion of the 2024/25 PRGT review for those that accessed the Food Shock Window through the RCF.
Keywords:
Cumulative Access Limits; Rapid Financing Instrument; Rapid Credit Facility; Food Insecurity; FSW request; FSW financing; UCT-quality program; FSW relative; FSW experience; FSW resource; Food security; Food prices; Emergency assistance; Balance of payments need; Global
Cover Policy Papers
The Managing Director's Global Policy Agenda, Annual Meetings 2022: Act Now, Act Together for a More Resilient World
International Monetary Fund
Reeling from multiple shocks, the global economic outlook looks increasingly difficult. Since last October, we have downgraded global growth and revised up inflation projections four times. Two years of pandemic, followed by the war in Ukraine, have taken a heavy toll on activity and global trade, exhausting both policy buffers and people’s patience. Now, a ‘cost-of-living crisis’ threatens livelihoods everywhere, with the most vulnerable hit the hardest, and acute food insecurity is an unbearable hardship in too many parts of the world. Multi-decade inflation highs, tightening financing conditions, rising food and energy insecurity, capital flow disruptions, and record high debt levels point to a particularly difficult and uncertain period ahead—especially in the context of slowing growth in the US, Europe, and China. The increasing frequency and intensity of climate-related disasters—devastating floods, droughts, and wildfires—adds to these challenges. While the ongoing digital revolution brings new opportunities, the recent turmoil in crypto asset markets is a reminder of the risks of unfettered digitalization.
Keywords:
financing practice; growth-inflation trade-off; emergency financing instrument; financing condition; debt transparency; Inflation; Food security; Global
Cover Policy Papers
Proposal for a Food Shock Window Under the Rapid Financing Instrument and Rapid Credit Facility
International Monetary Fund. Finance Dept.
,
International Monetary Fund. Legal Dept.
, and
International Monetary Fund. Strategy, Policy, & Review Department
Russia’s war in Ukraine has exacerbated global economic pressures, including through a food shock. The war and food-related spillovers—higher import prices for food and fertilizer and disruptions in supply lines for food importers, and a loss of revenue for some food exporters—add to urgent balance-of-payments (BOP) needs of many Fund members. They have also exacerbated acute food insecurity, now affecting 345 million people. While the best response to address BOP pressures would generally involve an Upper Credit Tranche-quality program, such a program may not be feasible in some cases or necessary in others. This paper proposes a time-bound food shock window under the Rapid Financing Instrument (RFI) and the Rapid Credit Facility (RCF) to provide support to members in such situations. The new window would be temporary and provide low-access emergency financing that increases the amounts currently available under the RFI/RCF. Members would need to demonstrate urgent BOP needs and meet a set of qualification criteria related to the global food shock. The window would be available for 12 months from the date of Board approval of the window. Countries requesting financing under the window would also need to meet the standard qualification criteria under the RFI/RCF.
Keywords:
emergency financing instrument; UCT-quality program; emergency financing Access; SMP policy; Food shock window; urgent balance of payments; Emergency assistance; Balance of payments need; Food security; Agricultural commodities; Credit; Global
Cover Policy Papers
Proposal for a Staff-Monitored Program with Executive Board Involvement
International Monetary Fund. Finance Dept.
,
International Monetary Fund. Legal Dept.
, and
International Monetary Fund. Strategy, Policy, & Review Department
This paper proposes an amendment to the policy on Staff-Monitored Programs (SMPs) that would allow for limited Executive Board involvement in opining on the robustness of a member’s policies to meet their stated objectives under an SMP and monitoring its implementation. To differentiate from regular SMPs, such SMPs would be called “Program Monitoring with Board Involvement” or “PMBs”. Their use would be only available to those (requesting) members who, in addition to seeking to build or rebuild a track record for Upper Credit Tranche (UCT) Use of Fund Resources (UFR), would benefit from targeted Executive Board involvement because of either (i) an ongoing concerted international effort by creditors or donors to provide substantial new financing or debt relief to the member or (ii) significant outstanding Fund credit under emergency financing instruments at the time new emergency financing is received. Members meeting criterion (i) or (ii) above would be strongly encouraged to request such a PMB. The PMB would support members in designing, implementing, and monitoring policies under often complex circumstances.
Keywords:
emergency financing instrument; UCT-quality program; SMP policy; PMB criterion; UCT-quality instrument; PMB policy; urgent balance of payments; Emergency assistance; Balance of payments need; Food security; Debt relief; Global
Cover Departmental Papers
Climate Change and Chronic Food Insecurity in Sub-Saharan Africa
Diogo Miguel Salgado Baptista
,
Mrs. Mai Farid
,
Dominique Fayad
,
Laurent Kemoe
,
Loic S Lanci
,
Ms. Pritha Mitra
,
Tara S Muehlschlegel
,
Cedric Okou
,
John A Spray
,
Kevin Tuitoek
, and
Ms. Filiz D Unsal
Climate change is intensifying food insecurity across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) with lasting adverse macroeconomic effects, especially on economic growth and poverty. Successive shocks from the war in Ukraine and COVID-19 pandemic have increased food prices and depressed incomes, raising the number of people suffering from high malnutrition and unable to meet basic food consumption needs by at least 30 percent to 123 million in 2022 or 12 percent of SSA’s population. Addressing the lack of resilience to climate change—that critically underlies food insecurity in SSA—will require careful policy prioritization against a backdrop of financing and capacity constraints. This paper presents some key considerations and examples of tradeoffs and complementarities across policies to address food insecurity. Key findings include (1) Fiscal policies focused on social assistance and efficient public infrastructure investment can improve poorer households’ access to affordable food, facilitate expansion of climate-resilient and green agricultural production, and support quicker recovery from adverse climate events; (2) Improving access to finance is key to stepping up private investment in agricultural resilience and productivity as well as improving the earning capacity and food purchasing power of poorer rural and urban households; and (3) Greater regional trade integration, complemented with resilient transport infrastructure, enables sales of one country’s bumper harvests to its neighbors’ facing shortages. The international community can help with financial assistance—especially for the above-mentioned social assistance and key infrastructure areas—capacity development, and facilitating transfers of technology and know-how.
Keywords:
Food Insecurity; Spatial Macroeconomics; Economic Development; Agricultural Policy; policy consideration; infrastructure investment; policy mix; SSA development outcome; cash transfer; IMF Library; price effect; increase dummy; fuel price hike; Climate change; Food prices; Food security; Agricultural sector; Agricultural commodities; Sub-Saharan Africa; Global; Africa; West Africa; East Africa
Cover Policy Papers
The Managing Director’s Global Policy Agenda, Spring Meetings 2022: The Global Economy Under Stress: Repercussions, Response, and Resilience
International Monetary Fund
The global policy agenda that follows recalibrates priorities to meet the new reality we are facing. The IMF also continues to adjust to respond to the rapidly evolving needs of our membership. Our flexibility has been evident over the past two years of the COVID crisis: unprecedented emergency financing; a historic Special Drawing Rights (SDR) allocation; an innovative plan to end the pandemic. Now, as we face another crisis on top of a crisis, we will continue to step up and support our member countries in every way we can—with financial resources, policy advice, and capacity development—working in collaboration with our international partners.
Keywords:
global economy under stress; price pressure; scarring effect; global economy well; country delivery; COVID-19; Food security; Global