Download Free Progress Report On The Activities Of The Independent Evaluation Office Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Progress Report On The Activities Of The Independent Evaluation Office and write the review.

NULL
This paper examines the performance of emerging market economies (EMs) during the recent global crisis and draws policy conclusions. It considers how EMs were affected by the initial impact of the crisis, examines the extent to which they were able to undertake countercyclical policies to moderate the impact, and highlights factors that have influenced the pace and timing of their recovery. Finally, it considers policy challenges facing EMs as the crisis subsides. This paper sheds light on the role of reserves in crises, and provides contextual background for work on the future financing role of the IMF.
Since the 2021 Annual Meetings, the IEO has made considerable progress with three ongoing evaluations, while two management implementation plans (MIPs) to follow up on recommendations from previous evaluations have been approved by the Board. In addition, to mark its twentieth birthday, the IEO organized a virtual conference to reflect on experience from its second decade and consider future challenges. We have also contributed to the ongoing work on institutional integrity at the IMF, drawing on a stocktaking of material contained in past evaluations and are considering additional work on these issues as we select two new evaluation topics later this year.
Since the October 2017 report to the IMFC, the IEO has completed an evaluation of the IMF’s work in fragile states and an update of its 2007 evaluation of IMF exchange rate policy advice. The office continued work on two evaluations, on IMF financial surveillance and on IMF advice on unconventional monetary policies, as well as an update of the 2008 evaluation of structural conditionality. It also launched an update of IEO’s 2008 Evaluation of IMF Governance. The IEO welcomes recent steps taken by the IMF to follow through on Board-endorsed recommendations of its 2016–17 evaluations.
This report describes recent follow-up on past Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) evaluations, summarizes the update of the 2006 evaluation of multilateral surveillance, and outlines the ongoing evaluations. It raises the concern that progress in implementing Board-endorsed IEO recommendations has been quite mixed, suggesting the need for further consideration to reinforcing the follow-up process.
This paper discusses that the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) has also launched three new evaluations—which will analyze the IMF’s role on fragile states, its financial surveillance activities, and its advice on unconventional monetary policies—and two evaluation updates—which will look into the IMF’s exchange rate policy advice and structural conditionality. The evaluation found that, for the most part, the IMF’s euro area surveillance identified the right issues during the pre-crisis period but did not foresee the magnitude of the risks that would later become paramount. The IMF’s surveillance of the financial regulatory architecture was generally of high quality, but staff, along with most other experts, missed the buildup of banking system risks in some countries. The report found several issues with the way decision making was managed by the IMF. In May 2010, the IMF Executive Board approved a decision to provide exceptional access financing to Greece without seeking preemptive debt restructuring, even though its sovereign debt was not deemed sustainable with a high probability.
This paper analyzes that the IMF has moved beyond its traditional fiscal-centric approach to recognize that social protection can also be macro-critical for broader reasons including social and political stability concerns. Evaluating the IMF’s involvement in social protection is complicated by the fact that there is no standard definition of social protection or of broader/overlapping terms such as social spending and social safeguards in (or outside) the IMF. In this evaluation, social protection is understood to include policies that provide benefits to vulnerable individuals or households. This evaluation found widespread IMF involvement in social protection across countries although the extent of engagement varied. In some cases, engagement was relatively deep, spanning different activities (bilateral surveillance, technical assistance, and/or programs) and involving detailed analysis of distributional impacts, discussion of policy options, active advocacy of social protection, and integration of social protection measures in program design and/or conditionality. This cross-country variation to some degree reflected an appropriate response to country-specific factors, in particular an assessment of whether social protection policy was macrocritical, and the availability of expertise from development partners or in the country itself.
IEO evaluations are an integral part of the Fund’s learning culture, helping the Fund absorb lessons that improve its work. In addition, the objectivity of IEO evaluations has bolstered the Fund’s credibility. In discussing the report of the External Evaluation of the IEO (the “Lissakers report”), Executive Directors welcomed the suggestions to strengthen follow-up to the IEO recommendations?including more Board involvement—and supported a more systematic approach for following up and monitoring the implementation of IEO recommendations approved by the Board. This periodic monitoring report (PMR) is the first such effort under the new procedures approved by the Executive Board in January 2007. In particular, it responds to the instruction that “Management shall present to the Board a periodic monitoring report on the state of implementation of actions contained in the forward-looking implementation plans already in force and not deemed completed on the occasion of a prior periodic monitoring report. These reports shall indicate difficulties in implementing the original plan and propose remedial or substitute actions whenever appropriate. The first periodic monitoring report shall be prepared following the delivery of the 2007 IEO Annual Report. As the IEO Annual Reports cover the status of all past IEO recommendations, it is expected that the first periodic monitoring report produced by Management would also review the implementation of recommendations made to date.”
Twelfth Periodic Monitoring Report On The Status Of Management Implementation Plans In Response To Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations
Overall, progress has been made since the Twelfth PMR on actions in response to eight IEO evaluations, with the pace of implementation being faster on actions October 31, 2023 THIRTEENTH PERIODIC MONITORING REPORT 2 INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND contained in the MIP in Response to the Executive Board-Endorsed Categorization of Open Actions in Management Implementation Plans. It is also worth mentioning that many open actions depend on the implementation of some important reviews/key steps that are expected to be completed in or soon after December 2023, such as the Capacity Development (CD) Strategy Review, the issuance of a new CD Guidance Note, an update of the Small Developing States Staff Guidance Note (SDS-SGN), the Operational Guidance Note (OGN) on Program Design and Conditionality, and a Board paper on Bank-Fund collaboration.