Download Free 2008 Triennial Surveillance Review Overview Paper Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online 2008 Triennial Surveillance Review Overview Paper and write the review.

This triennial surveillance review (TSR) takes place in a time of change, with the Fund in the midst of a major refocusing effort. That surveillance has not been as effective as it should be has been amply documented, notably in previous surveillance reviews and several IEO evaluations. Since the 2004 review of bilateral surveillance (BSR), considerable efforts have been made to enhance its effectiveness, including an overhaul of the policy framework with the adoption of a new Surveillance Decision in 2007. And as part of the refocusing effort, more change is underway to deliver on the Managing Director’s vision of an institution making better use of its comparative advantage, to be “more alert to emerging issues, more critical in its assessments (especially in good times), and more assertive in communicating its concerns.”
This paper assesses progress in strengthening Fund surveillance and identifies needed improvements. It differs from past reviews insofar as it: (A) encompasses not only bilateral but also multilateral surveillance; and (B) steps-up external inputs in the form of studies by outside observers, commentaries, and assessment of recommendations by an external advisory group.
This paper evaluates the IMF’s exchange rate analysis since the 2008 TSR. It focuses on the evolution of methods, the quality of the IMF‘s multilateral and bilateral exchange rate analysis, the evenhandedness and transparency of this analysis, and the need to improve the coverage and integration of external stability assessments.
Country surveillance constitutes an essential part of the IMF's mandate to oversee the international monetary system and to monitor the economic and financial policies of its 185 member countries. The IMF's Executive Board conducts regularly scheduled reviews of country surveillance (the Triennial Surveillance Review) to consider ways to improve its effectiveness. The 2008 review is the first such review since the Executive Board approved, in June 2007, a new Decision on Bilateral Surveillance. This Decision affirms that the focus of bilateral surveillance is on those policies of members that can significantly influence present or prospective external stability. The review focused on the implementation of country surveillance in the recent past, as presented in the following set of papers: • The overview paper presents the main findings and priority areas for further work. The review finds that stakeholders hold the quality of IMF surveillance in high regard, but that improvements should focus on risk assessment, integration of macroeconomic and financial sector surveillance, multilateral perspectives (cross-border spillovers and cross-country analysis), and exchange rate assessments. The priority areas identified in the review served as key background for the preparation of the IMF’s Statement of Surveillance Priorities (SSP). • The Thematic Findings (Supplement 1) provides supporting analysis on the implementation of bilateral surveillance in the recent past and, particularly, on the appropriateness of its focus and its analytical value added in particular areas, including the overall “health check”, exchange rates, financial sector issues, cross-country analysis and cross-border spillover analysis (including a case study of surveillance in the run up to the subprime crisis), the degree of candor and evenhandedness in surveillance, and the effectiveness of its communication. • The Background Information paper (Supplement 2) provides further information, including a description of review methodologies, and results including interview findings, surveys of various audiences, and supporting data on the quality of consultation documents. • The External Consultant’s Report provides an independent view of IMF surveillance in Europe.
This paper reviews the 2007 Surveillance Decision and the broader legal framework for surveillance. While the 2007 Surveillance Decision on Bilateral Surveillance over Members’ Policies (thereafter, the 2007 Decision) requires the Fund to review the decision itself, this paper takes a broader view. It recognizes that the 2007 Decision cannot be assessed in isolation from the legal framework it derives from, i.e., the Articles of Agreement, and that a debate on the adequacy of this broader framework is also necessary. The paper therefore discusses the strengths and limitations of the current system as set out in both the Articles of Agreement (primarily, Article IV) and the 2007 Decision and explores options going forward.
The coverage of risks has become more systematic since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC): staff reports now regularly identify major risks and provide an assessment of their likelihood and economic impact, summarized in Risk Assessment Matrices (RAM). But still limited attention is paid to the range of possible outcomes. Also, risk identification is useful only so much as to inform policy design to preemptively respond to relevant risks and/or better prepare for them. In this regard, policy recommendations in surveillance could be richer in considering various risk management approaches. To this end, progress is needed on two dimensions: • Increasing emphasis on the range of potential outcomes to improve policy design. • Encouraging more proactive policy advice on how to manage risks. Efforts should continue to leverage internal and external resources to support risk analysis and advice in surveillance.
NULL
This paper proposes a draft Integrated Surveillance Decision (ISD) for adoption. As part of broader efforts to strengthen Fund surveillance, the Fund is modernizing its legal framework to better support operations. In April 2012, the Fund’s Executive Board discussed Modernizing the Legal Framework for Surveillance—Building Blocks Toward an Integrated Surveillance Decision. That paper highlighted key weaknesses in the current legal framework for surveillance and provided proposals for addressing them. Most Directors agreed that introducing a new surveillance decision covering both bilateral and multilateral surveillance would help address these weaknesses. In particular, they agreed with the general proposed approach to fill the gaps in bilateral surveillance through multilateral surveillance
This collection explores the theme of fragmentation within international economic law following the global financial crisis.
This report is the seventh in a series of evaluation updates by the Independent Evaluation Office of the IMF (IEO) that return to past IEO evaluations and assess the continuing relevance of their main conclusions. The report revisits the 2007 evaluation of IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice, which found that the IMF was “not as effective as it needed to be” in fulfilling its responsibilities for exchange rate surveillance in the period 1999–2005. While acknowledging the inherent complexity of providing exchange rate policy advice, including the lack of professional consensus on many of the key issues, the evaluation observed serious weaknesses in the IMF’s work on key analytical issues and in its engagement with members. The update finds that the IMF has substantially overhauled its approach to exchange rate policy advice since 2007. Key steps taken include: adoption of a more comprehensive approach to exchange rate surveillance under the 2012 Integrated Surveillance Decision; development of enhanced analytical tools; a new institutional view on capital flows; and introduction of the annual External Sector Report that provides an integrated picture of the external balances of major economies. The IMF continues to work on further enhancements of its approach. Nonetheless, the update concludes that challenges remain that impact the effectiveness of the IMF’s work in an area central to its mandate. The approach for assessing external balances and exchange rates continues to be contentious, in part reflecting differing views across the membership about the process of external adjustment. There are also ongoing questions in other areas, including considerations for exchange rate regime choice, attention to policy spillovers, the institutional view on capital flows, and data availability. The update suggests that the persistence of key issues identified in 2007 merits a full evaluation by the IEO.