2011年-IMF国际货币组织全球_The_Impact_of_the_Global_Crisison_South_70页_1mb

Summary of "The Impact of the Global Crisis on South-Eastern Europe"

Core Content

This IMF Working Paper examines the impact of the global financial crisis on six South-Eastern European (SEE-6) countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. It analyzes both the pre-crisis macroeconomic and financial conditions and the policy responses to the crisis, with a focus on the role of fiscal and monetary policies, capital inflows, and external vulnerabilities.

Main Objective

The paper aims to:

• Compare macro-financial conditions and policies in the SEE-6 countries before the crisis.
• Identify country-specific strengths and vulnerabilities that influenced their performance during the crisis.
• Highlight the role of policy responses in shaping the outcomes, including the use of IMF financial support.

Key Findings

Pre-Crisis Conditions

• Common Features:

  • All countries experienced fast economic growth in a low inflation environment.
  • There were strong capital inflows and rapid credit growth, driven by foreign direct investment (FDI), bank lending, and improved financial integration.
  • A wider current account deficit and rising external debt-to-GDP ratios were notable, indicating growing external vulnerabilities.
  • High degree of euroization in the financial system, which increased FX-related credit risk.
  • Sound banking systems due to foreign ownership and improved regulatory frameworks.

• Differences:

  • Fiscal policy varied significantly. Four countries (Bosnia-Herzegovina, FYR Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia) adopted procyclical, expansionary fiscal policies just before the crisis, while Albania and Croatia were more prudent and attentive to external balance.
  • Monetary and exchange rate regimes also differed. Only Albania and Serbia had flexible exchange rate regimes, while others had fixed or quasi-fixed regimes, limiting their ability to respond countercyclically.

Impact of the Crisis

• The crisis began to affect the SEE-6 countries in late 2008 and intensified in mid-2009.
• External financing became more costly and limited, leading to abrupt contractions in domestic demand and sharp adjustments in current account deficits.
• Banking sector stress emerged due to panic-driven deposit runs and the drying up of foreign savings.
• GDP declined in all countries except Albania in 2009.

Policy Responses

• IMF-supported programs were initiated in Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina in 2009 to support adjustment and restore macroeconomic stability.
• Fiscal policy was constrained by pre-crisis expansionary stances, limiting the ability to use countercyclical measures.
• Monetary policy was constrained in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro, while in Croatia and FYR Macedonia, it was committed to maintaining currency stability.
• Serbia and Albania had more flexibility due to their flexible exchange rate regimes, allowing for countercyclical monetary easing.

Key Factors Influencing Crisis Outcomes

• Fiscal discipline and external financing requirements played a critical role in determining the need for IMF support.
• Market access was crucial for sustaining high external and fiscal financing needs.
• Foreign ownership of banks and euroization of financial systems increased exposure to FX-related risks, but also allowed for coordinated rollover of external liabilities through initiatives like the "Vienna Initiative".
• Structural reforms and investment incentives contributed to pre-crisis growth but also created vulnerabilities due to overreliance on non-tradable sectors.

Legacy of the Crisis

• The crisis led to:
  • A substantial correction in current account deficits.
  • Tighter credit conditions and deterioration in public finances.
  • Increased external debt since 2009.
  • A transition to a more balanced growth model with a greater emphasis on the tradable sector is necessary to avoid reaccumulation of imbalances.

Conclusion

The SEE-6 countries experienced a similar pre-crisis pattern of growth and capital inflows, but their policy responses and economic outcomes varied significantly. The procyclical fiscal policies and fixed exchange rate regimes in most countries limited their ability to respond effectively to the crisis. While the absence of currency and banking crises was a positive outcome, the region faces ongoing challenges in terms of external and fiscal sustainability. The role of the IMF and the decision to seek its support were influenced by a complex mix of economic, political, and institutional factors.