2015年-IMF国际货币组织全球_IMF_Engagement_with_Countries_in_Post_45页_1mb

Summary of IMF Engagement with Countries in Post-Conflict and Fragile Situations—Stocktaking

Introduction

This document, prepared by the IMF staff and completed on May 6, 2015, reviews the Fund's engagement with countries in post-conflict and fragile situations (FS) since the 2011 Board paper and the 2012 Guidance Note. It outlines the current state of engagement in three key areas: capacity building, Fund facilities and program design, and policy support. The findings are based on surveys, interviews, and data from the Monitoring of Fund Arrangements (MONA) database and the Institute for Capacity Development (ICD). The review also identifies areas for improvement and proposes next steps.

Core Content

1. Definition and Context

• Fragile States (FS) are defined as countries with weak institutional capacity (CPIA score ≤ 3.2) and/or recent experience of conflict (peace-keeping or peace-building operations in the last three years).
• There are 39 FS identified, with the majority located in Africa.
• FS face significant challenges including low administrative capacity, political instability, conflict, weak economic performance, and high dependency on external aid.
• Key economic indicators show that FS have lower per capita incomes and higher poverty rates compared to non-fragile states (NFS).

2. Fund Engagement with FS

The review focuses on the effectiveness of the Fund's engagement with FS, particularly in the context of the 2012 Guidance Note, which outlined seven principles for engagement. These principles include:

• More explicit consideration of the political context in policy advice.
• A well-tailored pace of macroeconomic adjustment.
• Opportunities for "quick wins" to build public support for reform.
• Inclusive growth and protection of social expenditure.
• Well-tailored structural reforms.
• Integrated capacity building.
• Contingency planning to address political and economic volatility.

3. Capacity Building

• Progress: Resources dedicated to capacity building in FS have increased, with a 40% rise in TA delivery (measured in person-years) from FY2009 to FY2014, contributing to an overall 63% increase in TA.
• Challenges: FS authorities feel that the current capacity building efforts are not fully aligned with their absorptive capacity. There is a need for more training and resident advisors.
• Proposals:
  • Introduce a new pilot approach based on a Capacity Building Framework (CBF) to better align support with country needs.
  • Expand the use of Results Based Management (RBM) in FY16 to enhance monitoring and evaluation.
  • Consider broader application of the CBF, including in non-FS low-income countries.
  • Foster knowledge sharing across teams and establish a new intranet-based FS thematic site.

4. Fund Facilities and Program Design

• RCF Usage: The Rapid Credit Facility (RCF) has been increasingly used by FS, as envisioned in the 2011 Board paper, often replacing Staff-Monitored Programs (SMPs).
• Program Design: The number of quantitative targets and structural benchmarks in programs has not changed much over the years, and program success rates are broadly similar between FS and NFS.
• Challenges:
  • Low access to RCF and other concessional financing.
  • Inadequate emphasis on inclusive growth and social protection in program design.
• Proposals:
  • Expand access to concessional financing for the poorest and most vulnerable FS members while maintaining the self-sustaining nature of the Poverty Reduction Growth and Trust (PRGT).
  • Explore options to enhance Facilities Review in the future to allow for more substantial changes.
  • Strengthen program success by targeting social spending floors and adopting contingency plans to protect fiscal stability during shocks.

5. Policy Support

• Quality: FS authorities generally view the Fund’s policy support as high quality.
• Challenges:
  • Fund teams need to improve their understanding of country-specific fragility contexts.
  • Recruitment challenges for desk economists and resident representatives due to the complexity and risks of working in FS.
• Proposals:
  • Continue training on political economy issues.
  • Enhance knowledge-sharing across teams working on FS.
  • Address security concerns through new policies and ensure equal career prospects for staff working in FS compared to non-FS positions.

Key Findings and Proposals

Key Findings

• Economic Performance: FS tend to have lower per capita incomes, higher poverty rates, and less diversified economies.
• Program Outcomes: While the number of successful programs is similar between FS and NFS, FS have a higher proportion of programs that go off-track quickly.
• Implementation Constraints: FS often have limited administrative capacity and face political and social challenges that affect program implementation.
• Low Response Rates: The survey of FS authorities had a low response rate (less than 30%), which may affect the comprehensiveness of the findings.

Key Proposals

Next Steps and Conclusions

• The review recommends further improvements in the alignment of capacity building with country needs and the expansion of concessional financing.
• It emphasizes the need for more targeted TA and training, as well as better coordination with development partners.
• The findings are expected to guide future staff efforts and may influence broader policy reforms and operational changes in the Fund’s engagement with FS.

Figures and Tables

• Figure 1: Distribution of Fragile States.
• Figure 2: Trends in Technical Assistance Delivery (FY2009–FY2014).
• Table 1: Basic Economic Trends (2005–2014).
• Table 2: Main Sources of Inputs to the Review.
• Table 3: Status Update on Recommendations from the 2011 Board Paper.

Box Highlights

• Box 1: Outlines the seven principles of the 2012 Guidance Note.
• Box 2: Provides case studies of technical assistance in Haiti, Somalia, and South Sudan.
• Box 3: Discusses staff training on political economy issues.

Conclusion

The review highlights both progress and challenges in the IMF’s engagement with FS. It proposes a number of initiatives aimed at improving the effectiveness of the Fund’s support, including the introduction of a new capacity building framework, expansion of concessional financing, and enhanced training and knowledge-sharing. The ultimate goal is to ensure that the Fund's engagement with FS is more responsive, effective, and aligned with the unique challenges of these countries.