2009年-IMF国际货币组织全球_The_Fund39s_Facilities_and_Financing_Framework_for_Low_25页_537kb

Summary of the Document: IMF Facilities and Financing Framework for Low-Income Countries

Core Content

This document provides an overview of the long-term economic performance of Low-Income Countries (LICs) and summarizes the findings of a survey conducted among IMF mission chiefs regarding the demand for and effectiveness of IMF facilities in these countries. It outlines the improvements in macroeconomic indicators and the diverse adjustment needs of LICs, emphasizing the role of IMF-supported programs in fostering stability and growth.

Main Points

I. Long-Term Economic Performance of Low-Income Countries

• Macroeconomic Improvements: Over the past two decades, LICs have experienced significant improvements in macroeconomic indicators such as real GDP growth, exports, reserves, and foreign direct investment (FDI). They have also seen reductions in inflation and external debt.
• Regional and Institutional Diversity: These improvements are observed across different regions, geographical groupings, and institutional capacities. However, the pace and extent of progress vary.
• Role of IMF Programs: Countries with extensive IMF program engagement have shown stronger improvements in macroeconomic performance, despite starting from adverse conditions. This suggests that sustained program support may have contributed to better outcomes.
• Fragile States and Stabilizers: Some LICs have reached "mature stabilizer" status, characterized by sustainable macroeconomic positions. Others remain in fragile situations, with lower growth, higher debt, and weaker institutional capacity.
• Convergence Trends: Mature stabilizers are converging with middle-income emerging economies in terms of GDP growth and FDI, though they still face higher current account deficits and greater aid dependency.

II. Survey of IMF Mission Chiefs

• Survey Overview: In January 2009, mission chiefs from 76 LICs that had received IMF missions in the past four years (2005–08) were surveyed on their experiences with Fund facilities.
• Response Rate: 67 mission chiefs (86% of the countries) responded to the survey.
• Demand for Fund Facilities:
  • Balance of Payments Needs: About 75% of LICs currently have balance of payments needs.
  • Types of Needs: Of these, 40% have both long-term and short-term needs, 30% have long-term needs only, and 25% have short-term needs only.
  • Precautionary Instruments: Mission chiefs indicated that several countries could benefit from a precautionary instrument.
• Program Engagement:
  • Program Access: Most countries with balance of payments needs were able to access a Fund-supported program.
  • Challenges in Access: In 14 cases, access to a Fund arrangement was not possible despite balance of payments needs. Reasons included inability to meet Fund conditionality, lack of suitable facilities, domestic political issues, conflict, and perceived stigma.
• Effectiveness of Programs:
  • Donor Financing: In most cases, Fund-supported programs helped catalyze donor financing, with over 75% of countries with a financing gap closing it with donor support.
  • PSI Demand: Of the countries currently in a Fund-supported program, nearly 75% are expected to request a successor program. Most will likely seek a PRGF arrangement, while between 5 and 13 countries may seek a Policy Support Instrument (PSI), indicating a potential increase in the number of PSIs.

Key Information

• Timeframe: The analysis covers the period from 1980–89, 1990–99, and 2000–07.
• Data Sources: The findings are based on data from the IMF, WEO, IFS, and World Bank databases.
• Definitions:
  • Mature Stabilizers: Countries with sustainable macroeconomic positions, including satisfactory growth, moderate inflation, manageable fiscal and current account deficits, adequate reserves, and strong policy and institutional capacity.
  • Fragile States: Countries with lower growth, higher debt, and weaker institutional capacity, as per CPIA ratings.
• Debt Sustainability: The document highlights the role of the Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) Initiative and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) in reducing external debt for some LICs.
• Global Crisis Impact: The economic gains of LICs may be at risk due to the ongoing global economic crisis, as these countries are increasingly integrated into the global economy.

Summary Tables

• Table 1: IMF Lending Programs for PRGF-Eligible Countries.
• Table 2: IMF Lending Programs for PRGF-Eligible Countries (continued).
• Table 3: IMF Lending Programs for PRGF-Eligible Countries: SAF, ESAF, and PRGF Commitments.
• Table 4: IMF Lending Programs for PRGF-Eligible Countries: SBA/EFF Approved.

Figures

• Figure 1: Selected macroeconomic indicators for LICs, particularly those with extensive IMF program engagement, show strong improvements in growth and inflation.
• Figure 2: Real GDP per capita growth and inflation have improved across different country groups.
• Figure 3: Government balance and current account balance have improved in LICs.
• Figure 4: Foreign direct investment and exports have increased significantly.
• Figure 5: Gross international reserves and external debt have improved.
• Figure 6: Macroeconomic adjustment in LICs has been a long process.
• Figure 7: External factors do not fully explain the long-term improvements in economic performance.
• Figure 8: Countries in fragile situations show significantly lower growth and reserves and higher debt compared to mature stabilizers.
• Figure 9: Non-fragile non-mature stabilizers have lower real GDP growth and reserves than mature stabilizers.
• Figure 10: The adjustment process for mature stabilizers has also been long.
• Figure 11: Mature stabilizers are catching up with middle-income emerging economies, but still face challenges.

Conclusion

The document underscores the importance of IMF-supported programs in improving the macroeconomic performance of LICs, particularly those with extensive engagement. It highlights the diversity in adjustment needs and the ongoing challenges faced by fragile states. The survey indicates a strong demand for Fund facilities, with a focus on balance of payments support and the potential for increased use of PSIs.