Africa > Uganda

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 58 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Social Services and Welfare x
Clear All Modify Search
International Monetary Fund
and
World Bank
The outlook for Low-Income Countries (LICs) is gradually improving, but they face persistent macroeconomic vulnerabilities, including liquidity challenges due to high debt service. There is significant heterogeneity among LICs: the poorest and most fragile countries have faced deep scarring from the pandemic, while those with diversified economies and Frontier Markets are faring better. Achieving inclusive growth and building resilience are essential for LICs to converge with more advanced economies and meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Building resilience will also be critical in the context of a more shock-prone world. This requires both decisive domestic actions, including expanding and better targeting Social Safety Nets (SSNs), and substantial external support, including adequate financing, policy advice, capacity development and, where needed, debt relief. The Fund is further stepping up its support through targeted policy advice, capacity building, and financing.
International Monetary Fund
Satisfactory implementation of the economic program supported by the Policy Support Instrument has helped Rwanda during the global economic downturn. The program focuses on maintaining a sustainable fiscal position; strengthening monetary and exchange rate policies; and supporting growth with structural reforms to diversify the export base and improve the business environment. The authorities are committed to assess the inflation to safeguard the gains made in macroeconomic stability that currently underpin the economic recovery. Executive Directors emphasized the need to maintain macroeconomic stability to achieve sustainable growth.
International Monetary Fund
This Joint Staff Advisory Note reviews the National Development Plan (NDP) 2010/11 to 2014/15 prepared by the government of Uganda. The NDP is the first in a series of six plans intended to move the country toward the national vision of a transformed modern economy in the next 30 years. The NDP expands on the vision of the earlier Poverty Eradication Action Plans, and was developed through an extensive and broad-based country-driven consultative process over the period 2008–09. IMF staff has recommended some measures to strengthen the NDP and enhance its implementation.
International Monetary Fund
This paper discusses key findings of the Seventh Review Under the Policy Support Instrument (PSI) for Uganda. The medium-term outlook for Uganda remains favorable but risks are on the rise. Growth is expected to rebound to its potential in the coming two years on the heels of a supportive fiscal stance and higher global and regional growth. It remains vulnerable to exogenous shocks as well as to election-related uncertainties. IMF staff supports the authorities’ request for a new three-year PSI to anchor their near- and medium-term policies.
International Monetary Fund
This paper discusses key findings of the Fifth Review under the policy support instrument for Uganda. Strong fundamentals and prudent economic policies of the past give Uganda scope to implement measured countercyclical policies without undermining macroeconomic stability. Monetary policy has been gradually eased in the face of the dry-up in private external financing. In spite of the slowdown-induced shortfall in tax revenue, the fiscal authorities are committed to accelerate and improve execution of investment spending to provide a positive impulse to growth and remove critical bottlenecks.
International Monetary Fund
This paper discusses key findings of the Third Review Under the Policy Support Instrument for Uganda. All end-December 2007 assessment criteria were met. Macroeconomic performance remains strong and the growth outlook remains positive. IMF staff supports the authorities’ request for waivers of nonobservance of four structural assessment criteria for end-May and end-June 2008. Nonobservance of these assessment criteria was largely owed to changes in program design in light of new information and reassessment of costs and priorities that do not compromise the integrity of the program.