Download Free Learning How To Cope With Capital Inflows Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Learning How To Cope With Capital Inflows and write the review.

This supplement provides further information on some of the issues covered in Recent Experiences in Managing Capital Inflows—Cross-Cutting Themes and Possible Policy Framework that have been highlighted in staff’s informal discussions with Directors. These include the role of supply-side factors behind the surge in capital flows and the nature of the framework pertaining to the use of capital flow management measures (CFMs).
"This is a very timely book that brings the reader to the forefront of current research on macroeconomic policy issues in economies subject to sizable capital flows".--Guillermo A. Calvo, University of Maryland.
Emerging markets (EMs) are experiencing a surge in capital inflows, lifting asset prices and growth prospects. While inflows are typically beneficial for receiving countries, inflow surges can carry macroeconomic and financial stability risks. This paper reviews the recent experience of EMs in dealing with capital inflows and suggests a possible framework for IMF policy advice on the spectrum of measures available to policymakers to manage inflows, including macroeconomic policies, prudential measures and capital controls. Illustrative applications of this framework suggest that it may be appropriate for several countries, based on their current circumstances, to consider prudential measures or capital controls in response to capital inflows. The suggested framework is intended to inform staff policy advice to all Fund members with open capital accounts. It forms part of a broader effort to sharpen Fund surveillance, preserve evenhandedness, and foster greater global policy coordination. As indicated in the Supplement to this paper, this broader effort includes the development of “global rules of the game” on macroprudential policies, capital account liberalization, and reserve adequacy, and the preparation of spillover reports assessing spillovers from the five systemic economies—all of which will inform the current and broader framework being developed.
The Guidance Note for the Liberalization and Management of Capital Flows (IMF 2013a) provides operational guidance to staff on the use of the Fund’s institutional view on the liberalization and management of capital flows (Box 1). It discusses appropriate policies with respect to the liberalization of capital flows and the management of disruptive capital inflows and outflows. With respect to capital outflows, the institutional view considers that capital flow management measures (CFMs) may be appropriate in crisis-type circumstances or, in the context of capital flow liberalization, if countries find that they have liberalized prematurely and are unable to handle the resulting capital flows. In non-crisis-type circumstances, the guidance considers outflows as being appropriately handled by macroeconomic, financial, and structural policies. It is intended to mirror the policy advice with respect to capital inflows. The guidance is, however, relatively brief and would benefit from some elaboration to lay out the possible configurations of policies in the context of the institutional view. This note seeks to provide such an elaboration, which is particularly relevant as capital outflows are becoming a more relevant policy challenge.
This paper examines whether—and how—emerging market economies (EMEs) respond to capital flows to mitigate their untoward consequences. Based on a sample of about 50 EMEs over 2005Q1–2013Q4, we find that EME policy makers respond proactively to capital inflows by using a combination of policy tools: central banks raise the policy interest rate to address economic overheating concerns; intervene in the foreign exchange market to resist currency appreciation pressures; tighten macroprudential measures to dampen credit growth; and deploy capital inflow controls in the face of competitiveness and financial-stability concerns. Contrary to conventional policy advice to EMEs, we find no evidence of counter-cyclical fiscal policy in the face of capital inflows. Overall, policies are more likely to respond, and used in combination, during inflow surges than in more normal times.
Staff Discussion Notes showcase the latest policy-related analysis and research being developed by individual IMF staff and are published to elicit comment and to further debate. These papers are generally brief and written in nontechnical language, and so are aimed at a broad audience interested in economic policy issues. This Web-only series replaced Staff Position Notes in January 2011.
As a result of the Asian crisis, methods of coping with volatile international capital markets have received considerable attention from observers and policymakers. It has been argued that the imposition by Chile of a nonremunerated reserve requirement on external borrowing played a useful role in the smooth liberalization of its capital account by allowing Chile to deal effectively with short-term capital inflows and thus to reduce its vulnerability to external shocks, and that such measures should be adopted by other countries. In light of this, this paper reviews Chile’s experience in managing capital flows and draws lessons for policymakers.
We study the optimal management of capital flows in a small open economy model with financial frictions and multiple policy instruments. The paper reports two main findings. First, both foreign exchange intervention (FXI) and macroprudential polices are tools complementary to the monetary policy rate that can largely reduce inflation and output volatility in a scenario of capital outflows. Second, the optimal policy mix depends on the underlying shock driving capital flows. FXI takes the leading role in response to foreign interest rate shocks, while macroprudential policy becomes the prominent tool for domestic risk shocks. These results highlight the importance of calibrating the use of multiple instruments according to the underlying shocks that induce shifts in capital flows.
Liberalization of capital flows can benefit both source and recipient countries by improving resource allocation, reducing financing costs, increasing competition and accelerating the development of domestic financial systems. The empirical evidence, however, is mixed on the benefits, and it suggests that countries benefit most when they meet certain thresholds related to institutional and financial development. The principal cost of capital flow liberalization stems from the economic instability brought on by volatile capital flows. In extreme cases, sudden stops or reversals in capital inflows can trigger financial crises followed by prolonged periods of weak growth.