Do Imf Supported Programs Work A Survey Of The Cross Country Empirical Evidence Mohsin Khan

Over the last two decades a number of cross-country empirical studies have been undertaken to assess whether IMF-supported adjustment programs have led to an improved balance of payments and current account balance, lower inflation, and higher growth. These studies use a variety of methodologies and cover different country samples and time periods. This paper critically surveys the evidence yielded by the cross-country studies, paying special attention to the pros and cons of the respective empirical methodologies employed. These studies, particularly the more recent ones, conclude that IMF-supported programs have generally been successful in stabilizing the economy.

Over the last two decades a number of cross-country empirical studies have been undertaken to assess whether IMF-supported adjustment programs have led to an improved balance of payments and current account balance, lower inflation, and higher growth. These studies use a variety of methodologies and cover different country samples and time periods. This paper critically surveys the evidence yielded by the cross-country studies, paying special attention to the pros and cons of the respective empirical methodologies employed. These studies, particularly the more recent ones, conclude that IMF-supported programs have generally been successful in stabilizing the economy.

Research work by the IMF’s staff on the effectiveness of the country programs the organization supports, which has long been carried out, has intensified in recent years. IMF analysts have sought to “open up the black box” by more closely examining program design and implementation, as well as how these influence programs’ effectiveness. Their efforts have also focused on identifying the lending, signaling, and monitoring features of the IMF that may affect member countries’ economic performance. This book reports on a large portion of both the new and the continuing research. It concludes that IMF programs work best where domestic politics and institutions permit the timely implementation of the necessary measures and when a country is vulnerable to, but not yet in, a crisis. It points to the need for a wider recognition of the substantial diversity among IMF member countries and for programs to be tailored accordingly while broadly maintaining the IMF’s general principle of uniformity of treatment.

I analyze empirically whether program size (the size of financial assistance) and policy adjustment matter for the success of IMF-supported programs. I define a program as successful if the initial program projections for net private capital flows are met or exceeded. I find that success is negatively associated with the size of financial assistance, especially in countries with market access, and that projection biases binding constraints on the amount of IMF lending may account for this association. Moreover, policy adjustment seems to have a causal positive effect on the likelihood of program success.

Using a cross-country sample of 169 IMF-supported programs and detailed studies of 15 programs, this evaluation report examines various aspects of fiscal adjustment in IMF-supported programs. It presents evidence that does not support some critics’ view that IMF-supported programs typically adopt a one-size-fits-all approach to fiscal adjustment, nor the perception that programs always involve austerity by targeting reductions in public spending. The report also proposes a number of recommendations for IMF surveillance and program design in the future.

This paper studies the short and longer-term impact of IMF engagement in Low-Income Countries (LICs) over nearly three decades. In contrast to earlier studies, we focus on a sample composed exclusively of LICs and disentangle the different effects of IMF longer-term engagement and short-term financing using a propensity score matching approach to control for selection bias. Our results indicate that longer-term IMF support (at least five years of program engagement per decade) helped LICs sustain economic growth and boost resilience by building fiscal buffers. Interestingly, the size of IMF financing has no significant impact on economic growth, possibly pointing to the prominent role of IMF policy advice and institutional capacity building in the context of longer-term engagement. We also present evidence that the short-term IMF engagement through augmentations of existing programs or short-term and emergency facilities is positively associated with a wide range of macroeconomic outcomes. Notably, the IMF financial support has the greatest impact on short-term growth when LICs are faced with substantial macroeconomic imbalances or exogenous shocks.

This paper reports for uncovered interest parity (UIP) using daily data for 23 developing and developed countries during the crisis-strewn 1990s. UIP is a classic topic of international finance, a critical building block of most theoretical models, and a dismal empirical failure. UIP states that the interest differential is, on average, equal to the ex post exchange rate change. UIP may work differently for countries in crisis, whose exchange and interest rates both display considerably more volatility. This volatility raises the stakes for financial markets and central banks; it also may provide a more statistically powerful test for the UIP hypothesis. Policy-exploitable deviations from UIP are, therefore, a necessary condition for an interest rate defense. There is a considerable amount of heterogeneity in the results, which differ wildly by country.

This paper explains the IMF approach to economic stabilization. It argues that a Fund-supported program is a process, comprising six broadly defined phases, that evolves along a multiplicity of potential pathways. The paper discusses the three-pronged approach to stabilization at the core of all IMF-supported programs, stresses the iterative character of “financial programming,” and explains the rationale for setting quantitative performance criteria for fiscal and monetary policy in IMF-supported arrangements. A main theme is that IMF-supported programs contain a great deal of flexibility to respond both to differences in circumstances and to changes in conditions in individual cases.

This economic journal contains theoretical and empirical analyses of varous macroeconomic issues. The studies are prepapred by IMF research staff or consultants. Subjects covered inclulde balance of payments and exchange rates, monetary systems and policies, public finances, international trade, economic growth, and some sectoral analyses. The last issue of the year contains an index to the volume. Approximately 200 pages in each issue.