Do IMF-Supported Programs Work? A Survey of the Cross-Country Empirical EvidenceWP/98/169-EAWP/98/169 .Do IMF-Supported Programs Work? A Survey of the Cross-Country Empirical Evidence. Prepared by Nadeem Ul Haque and Mohsin S. Khan An important question often raised in connection with IMF-supported adjustment programs is whether such programs .work. in terms of improving the current account balance, increasing international reserves, lowering inflation, and raising the growth rate. The answer requires evaluating the effects of past programs on the variables of interest. Over the past twenty years or so there have been a number of empirical studies on the subject, both inside and outside the IMF; this paper reviews the evidence provided by these studies. The survey of the literature on the cross-country empirical evidence on the macroeconomic effects of IMF-supported adjustment programs points to two broad conclusions. First, the empirical analyses have been conducted using different methodologies, the relative merits of which deserve careful examination. This paper argues that the proper standard for measuring program effects is to compare the macroeconomic outcomes under a program with the outcomes that would have emerged in the absence of a program. Several recent studies attempt to apply this .counterfactual. criteria to evaluating program performance through the estimation of policy reaction functions for program and non-program countries. Second, the results of most of the cross-country empirical studies indicate that IMF-supported programs lead to an improvement in the current account balance and the overall balance of payments. Several recent studies indicate that the rate of inflation falls, but this change is generally not found to be statistically significant. In the case of growth, the consensus seems to be that output will be depressed in the short run, but over time growth begins to rise. These newer empirical results indicate that, on average, IMF-supported adjustment programs have been more effective in achieving their objectives than earlier analyses suggest. |