## Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system](https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2012/_041012.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2012/_041012.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2012/_041012.pdf.json)

---

### Mandate and motivation
- The Fund’s responsibility is to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system, thereby promoting economic and financial stability and growth.
- The recent crisis underscored that these goals are best served by Fund surveillance that seeks to ensure that members’ financial systems are properly regulated and supervised, and maintain the right balance between dynamism and stability.
- The Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR) called for a report on the key elements of the Fund’s strategy in this area to inform cooperation with new global actors (for example, the G-20 and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)) and to solicit input from the IMFC and other stakeholders.

### Scope and comparative advantages
- Two key lessons from the crisis shaped recent strengthening of financial surveillance:
  - At the national level, macroeconomic policymakers and micro-prudential regulators need to expand focus to account for implications of their actions for domestic financial system stability.
  - At the multilateral level, effective surveillance requires improved systemic risk monitoring and enhanced cooperation.
- The Fund’s comparative advantages: global membership, an independent voice, extensive analytical capabilities, and established vehicles for macrofinancial surveillance at national and global levels.
- The agenda is intended to be delivered within available resources and in the context of the Fund’s broader surveillance priorities.

### Instruments for financial surveillance
- Bilateral instruments:
  - Article IV surveillance remains the main vehicle for financial surveillance.
  - Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) provides the principal instrument for in-depth assessment of systemic risks and robustness of regulatory, supervisory, and crisis management systems.
- Multilateral instruments:
  - Global Financial Stability Report (GFSR) integrated with the World Economic Outlook (WEO) and regional surveillance documents.
  - Vulnerability exercises, Early Warning Exercise (EWE), thematic multi-country reports, spillover reports.
- Procedural and coverage changes:
  - Introduction of more flexible procedures for FSAPs.
  - Adoption of mandatory FSAPs for 25 jurisdictions with systemically important financial sectors.
  - Managing Director’s Action Plan following the TSR launched initiatives to enhance coverage of financial sector issues in surveillance.
- Intensified cooperation and joint work with other stakeholders.

### Accountability and strategy development
- A review of progress on all recommendations in the Managing Director’s Action Plan for Surveillance will be conducted ahead of the 2012 Annual Meetings.
- A detailed strategic plan for the Fund’s work in these areas will be forthcoming to:
  - define policy priorities as the global economy exits from the crisis,
  - identify attendant resource implications and tradeoffs,
  - clarify the Fund’s role in the evolving global architecture and its relationship with the FSB once the FSB’s role and legal status are clarified in light of direction provided by the G-20.

### Financial surveillance priorities — immediate and medium-term
- The Fund’s financial surveillance work agenda has three complementary dimensions:
  - Immediate priorities related to containing the impact and spillovers of the current crisis.
  - Medium-term priorities: enhancing systemic risk monitoring, and building more resilient financial systems to support growth.
- Forward-looking elements build on existing Fund work and policy papers on macroprudential policy frameworks, capital flow management, cross-border resolution, sovereign debt crises, too-big-to-fail, and financial subsidiarization.

#### A. Immediate Priority: Containing the Current Crisis
- Objective: facilitate recovery from the global financial crisis by restoring financial stability (notably but not only in the euro area) and limit spillovers to other regions.
- Key focus areas:
  - Restoring financial stability in advanced economies:
    - Ensure appropriate systemic liquidity, strengthened banking sectors, and an adequate firewall, complementing a coordinated set of supportive macroeconomic policies.
    - Ensure oversight of the shadow banking sector.
  - Preventing excessive global deleveraging and improving monitoring of contagion risks:
    - Fund analysis aims to monitor and anticipate risks from excessive global deleveraging.
    - Policy advice focuses on measures to contain effects of deleveraging, including multilateral cooperation (see recent GFSR and WEO reports).
    - The 2012 Spillover Report will be shared with the Board in July.
  - Addressing challenges facing emerging and developing economies:
    - Respond to volatile capital inflows, overheating pressures, and rising financial vulnerabilities.
    - Assess macroeconomic policy mix adjustments, including applying macroprudential and capital flow management measures where appropriate.

#### B. Medium-Term Priorities
- Overarching aims: improve members’ and the global system’s ability to understand and monitor systemic risk, build resilient and growth-enhancing financial systems, and strengthen crisis prevention and management capabilities.
- Recognition that many policy approaches are work in progress and that “one size does not fit all.”

- Enhancing Global Systemic Risk Monitoring:
  - Developing a macrofinancial approach to global surveillance:
    - Adopt a more systemic focus and integrated approach to macrofinancial policies at the global level.
    - Incorporate this perspective in multilateral surveillance vehicles (notably in the recent GFSR and WEO), spillover reports, and work on interconnectedness.
  - Refining the analysis of interconnectedness:
    - Improve understanding of spillovers from highly interconnected financial centers, institutions, and markets.
    - Ongoing refinements in analysis of trade and financial interconnectedness to inform policy implications of spillovers and contagion at bilateral, regional, and global levels.
    - Future analysis will focus on policy implications of cross-border banking, fiscal-financial linkages, and financial openness.
  - Filling information gaps:
    - Engage with other global stakeholders on the G-20 data gaps initiative, including strengthening sectoral and cross-border accounts and developing data templates for global systemically important financial institutions and infrastructures.
    - Expand Fund capacity to monitor developments in systemically important entities, while oversight remains with relevant supervisory authorities.
  - Contributing to a framework for orderly resolution of global banks:
    - Domestic resolution toolkits need enhancement and a pragmatic framework for cross-border bank resolution is required.
    - IMF staff earlier contributed to the FSB’s “Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes,” published in November 2011.
    - The Fund is working with the FSB, World Bank, and standard setters to develop a methodology to assess implementation of these measures by the end of 2013.

- Distilling Country Experiences to Develop Good Practices for Resilient Financial Systems:
  - Developing macroprudential approaches:
    - Draw lessons from country experience and Fund analysis for bilateral surveillance and technical assistance.
    - Design better tools to identify and monitor systemic risk, stress test financial systems, analyze costs and benefits of macroprudential instruments, and explore governance and accountability arrangements.
  - Deepening the understanding of macrofinancial linkages:
    - Emphasize national balance sheets and flows in bilateral surveillance to identify vulnerabilities.
    - Conduct research on implications of credit cycles and real estate booms and busts for real economy and policy responses of monetary and macroprudential policies.
  - Strengthening financial oversight:
    - Cooperate with the FSB and other standard setters to enhance global financial regulation and supervision.
    - Participate in designing revisions to standards and assessment methodologies.
    - In FSAPs, bilateral surveillance, and technical assistance, assess and facilitate members’ adherence to international standards and evaluate impact of regulatory reform agenda, including Basel II/III requirements.
    - Identify intended and unintended macroeconomic consequences of the reform agenda.
  - Managing capital flows:
    - Develop a balanced and flexible approach to managing capital flows to reap benefits of capital mobility while limiting risks.
    - A series of papers has been presented to the Board to inform policy design as called for by the IMFC.
  - Assessing vulnerabilities in nonbank financial institutions:
    - Develop methodologies for assessing vulnerabilities in nonbank financial institutions and markets (for example, stress testing tools for insurance).
    - FSAPs increasingly focus on potential systemic risks from financial market infrastructures.
  - Promoting financial sector deepening:
    - Explore links between financial stability and economic growth, and challenges and opportunities from financial deepening and inclusion, particularly in low-income countries.
    - Technical assistance is geared toward capacity building alongside carefully sequenced liberalization.

### Bilateral interactions and global stakeholders
- The Fund’s main counterparts are national authorities (including central banks and financial supervisory agencies); interactions are two-way: disseminating the Fund’s analysis and policy advice and learning from members’ experience.
- The Fund’s financial surveillance work involves close collaboration with global stakeholders:
  - The G-20:
    - The Fund works with the G-20 to assess members’ success in meeting commitments in the Cannes Action Plan, including financial sector reforms and steps to avoid disruptive deleveraging.
    - The Fund draws on the FSB’s monitoring of the implementation of agreed G-20 financial reforms.
  - The FSB:
    - Missions overlap but approaches have been complementary, leveraging comparative advantages and generating synergies.
    - As laid out in the 2008 joint letter, the Fund is responsible for surveillance of the global financial system and the policies of its members, and assesses macrofinancial risks and systemic vulnerabilities; the FSB leads in elaboration of international financial sector supervisory and regulatory policies and standards, coordination of standard setting bodies, and assessment of financial system vulnerabilities.
    - The IMF and the FSB conduct jointly the Early Warning Exercise and collaborate on special projects on a case-by-case basis, such as the joint report to the G-20 on macroprudential policy frameworks.
    - The Fund is working with the FSB on filling data and information gaps exposed by the recent crisis and is supporting other FSB activities, such as peer reviews and the initiative to promote adherence to cooperation and information exchange standards.
    - As a member of the FSB, the Fund brings an independent and unique perspective reflecting the interests of its entire membership.
    - The experience to date provides a solid foundation for close collaboration, though modalities may need to evolve in light of the G-20 call for strengthening the FSB’s capacity, resources, and governance.
    - Footnote: The Fund―like other international financial institutions―has clarified that it is not bound to support any decisions that are inconsistent with its own legal and policy framework. This is particularly important regarding the FSB’s cooperation and information exchange initiative, under which the Fund does not participate in decisions regarding the listing of non-cooperative jurisdictions and the adoption of negative measures relating to those jurisdictions that are not in accordance with the Fund’s legal framework and policies.
  - Standard setters:
    - The IMF cooperates in development and monitoring of international standards and brings the perspective of its universal membership, FSAPs, and general surveillance work.
    - The Fund is itself a standard setter in data compilation and dissemination and transparency in fiscal, monetary, and financial policies.
    - The Fund assesses compliance with all core international financial sector standards through ROSCs, conducted in cooperation with the World Bank in developing and emerging market countries.
  - The World Bank:
    - The Fund cooperates with the World Bank in FSAPs in developing and emerging market countries—the Bank focuses on development issues and the Fund on stability—with the goal of supporting durable economic growth and financial inclusion.
    - FSAPs in advanced economies are carried out exclusively by the Fund.
    - The Fund coordinates with the Bank in providing technical assistance on financial sector issues and debt management support (through the Medium-Term Debt Strategy).
  - Financial market participants:
    - Through the Financial Institutions Consultative Group and other consultative bodies, the Fund engages in informal dialogue with private international financial market participants on the impact of new regulatory measures and risks to global financial stability.
    - The Fund seeks views of financial market participants in regular bilateral and multilateral activities.

### The Managing Director’s Action Plan for Surveillance — strengthening financial sector coverage
- Action Plan steps to integrate macrofinancial linkages and financial sector issues into regular surveillance:
  - Increased use of financial sector expertise in Article IV consultations:
    - Assign a financial expert to each Article IV team for countries with systemically important financial sectors (for which stability assessments under the FSAP are mandatory) and for countries with mounting financial vulnerabilities.
  - Deepening financial sector analysis in bilateral surveillance:
    - Internal training is being stepped up and good practices disseminated more widely.
    - Cross-country lessons are being drawn from recent FSAPs.
    - In bilateral surveillance, FSAP recommendations will be tracked systematically and progress reported regularly.
    - Research on implications of credit cycles and real estate boom and busts will be incorporated into regular surveillance work.
    - The forthcoming External Sector Reports will include an analysis of capital flows.
  - Improving availability of financial sector information:
    - Data availability remains a constraint to better macrofinancial analysis; there is a need to ensure financial sector data inadequacies are reported more candidly.
    - The TSR found that only 5 reports out of 50 reported any data shortcomings in this area.
    - The next Review of Data Provision to the Fund for Surveillance Purposes has been brought forward to 2012 to examine this issue.
    - The Fund is cooperating with national authorities and multilateral bodies to promote better data on globally systemically important financial institutions.
  - Modernizing the legal framework:
    - An integrated surveillance decision, discussed as a follow up to the Triennial Surveillance Review, would clarify the importance of focusing on global economic and financial stability and enable surveillance to focus on non-balance of payments spillovers.
  - Adopting a financial sector surveillance strategy:
    - The strategy would cover objectives and instruments of the Fund’s surveillance over the global financial system, countries’ implementation of financial sector and macroprudential policies, work on macro-financial linkages, and the relationship with other global stakeholders.
    - The present paper is the first step toward this strategy.

*IMF — Excerpt: "Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system" (content unit).*

### 1.      Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the

### 1.      Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system

### Mandate and motivation
- The Fund’s responsibility is to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system, thereby promoting economic and financial stability and growth.
- The recent crisis underscored that these goals are best served by Fund surveillance that seeks to ensure that members’ financial systems are properly regulated and supervised, and maintain the right balance between dynamism and stability.
- The Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR) called for a report on the key elements of the Fund’s strategy in this area to inform cooperation with new global actors (for example, the G-20 and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)) and to solicit input from the IMFC and other stakeholders.

### Scope and comparative advantages
- Two key lessons from the crisis shaped recent strengthening of financial surveillance:
  - At the national level, macroeconomic policymakers and micro-prudential regulators need to expand focus to account for implications of their actions for domestic financial system stability.
  - At the multilateral level, effective surveillance requires improved systemic risk monitoring and enhanced cooperation.
- The Fund’s comparative advantages: global membership, an independent voice, extensive analytical capabilities, and established vehicles for macrofinancial surveillance at national and global levels.
- The agenda is intended to be delivered within available resources and in the context of the Fund’s broader surveillance priorities.

### Instruments for financial surveillance
- Bilateral instruments:
  - Article IV surveillance remains the main vehicle for financial surveillance.
  - Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) provides the principal instrument for in-depth assessment of systemic risks and robustness of regulatory, supervisory, and crisis management systems.
- Multilateral instruments:
  - Global Financial Stability Report (GFSR) integrated with the World Economic Outlook (WEO) and regional surveillance documents.
  - Vulnerability exercises, Early Warning Exercise (EWE), thematic multi-country reports, spillover reports.
- Procedural and coverage changes:
  - Introduction of more flexible procedures for FSAPs.
  - Adoption of mandatory FSAPs for 25 jurisdictions with systemically important financial sectors.
  - Managing Director’s Action Plan following the TSR launched initiatives to enhance coverage of financial sector issues in surveillance.
- Intensified cooperation and joint work with other stakeholders.

### Accountability and strategy development
- A review of progress on all recommendations in the Managing Director’s Action Plan for Surveillance will be conducted ahead of the 2012 Annual Meetings.
- A detailed strategic plan for the Fund’s work in these areas will be forthcoming to:
  - define policy priorities as the global economy exits from the crisis,
  - identify attendant resource implications and tradeoffs,
  - clarify the Fund’s role in the evolving global architecture and its relationship with the FSB once the FSB’s role and legal status are clarified in light of direction provided by the G-20.

### Financial surveillance priorities — immediate and medium-term
- The Fund’s financial surveillance work agenda has three complementary dimensions:
  - Immediate priorities related to containing the impact and spillovers of the current crisis.
  - Medium-term priorities: enhancing systemic risk monitoring, and building more resilient financial systems to support growth.
- Forward-looking elements build on existing Fund work and policy papers on macroprudential policy frameworks, capital flow management, cross-border resolution, sovereign debt crises, too-big-to-fail, and financial subsidiarization.

#### A. Immediate Priority: Containing the Current Crisis
- Objective: facilitate recovery from the global financial crisis by restoring financial stability (notably but not only in the euro area) and limit spillovers to other regions.
- Key focus areas:
  - Restoring financial stability in advanced economies:
    - Ensure appropriate systemic liquidity, strengthened banking sectors, and an adequate firewall, complementing a coordinated set of supportive macroeconomic policies.
    - Ensure oversight of the shadow banking sector.
  - Preventing excessive global deleveraging and improving monitoring of contagion risks:
    - Fund analysis aims to monitor and anticipate risks from excessive global deleveraging.
    - Policy advice focuses on measures to contain effects of deleveraging, including multilateral cooperation (see recent GFSR and WEO reports).
    - The 2012 Spillover Report will be shared with the Board in July.
  - Addressing challenges facing emerging and developing economies:
    - Respond to volatile capital inflows, overheating pressures, and rising financial vulnerabilities.
    - Assess macroeconomic policy mix adjustments, including applying macroprudential and capital flow management measures where appropriate.

#### B. Medium-Term Priorities
- Overarching aims: improve members’ and the global system’s ability to understand and monitor systemic risk, build resilient and growth-enhancing financial systems, and strengthen crisis prevention and management capabilities.
- Recognition that many policy approaches are work in progress and that “one size does not fit all.”

Enhancing Global Systemic Risk Monitoring
- Developing a macrofinancial approach to global surveillance:
  - Adopt a more systemic focus and integrated approach to macrofinancial policies at the global level.
  - Incorporate this perspective in multilateral surveillance vehicles (notably in the recent GFSR and WEO), spillover reports, and work on interconnectedness.
- Refining the analysis of interconnectedness:
  - Improve understanding of spillovers from highly interconnected financial centers, institutions, and markets.
  - Ongoing refinements in analysis of trade and financial interconnectedness to inform policy implications of spillovers and contagion at bilateral, regional, and global levels.
  - Future analysis will focus on policy implications of cross-border banking, fiscal-financial linkages, and financial openness.
- Filling information gaps:
  - Engage with other global stakeholders on the G-20 data gaps initiative, including strengthening sectoral and cross-border accounts and developing data templates for global systemically important financial institutions and infrastructures.
  - Expand Fund capacity to monitor developments in systemically important entities, while oversight remains with relevant supervisory authorities.
- Contributing to a framework for orderly resolution of global banks:
  - Domestic resolution toolkits need enhancement and a pragmatic framework for cross-border bank resolution is required.
  - IMF staff earlier contributed to the FSB’s “Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes,” published in November 2011.
  - The Fund is working with the FSB, World Bank, and standard setters to develop a methodology to assess implementation of these measures by the end of 2013.

Distilling Country Experiences to Develop Good Practices for Resilient Financial Systems
- Developing macroprudential approaches:
  - Draw lessons from country experience and Fund analysis for bilateral surveillance and technical assistance.
  - Design better tools to identify and monitor systemic risk, stress test financial systems, analyze costs and benefits of macroprudential instruments, and explore governance and accountability arrangements.
- Deepening the understanding of macrofinancial linkages:
  - Emphasize national balance sheets and flows in bilateral surveillance to identify vulnerabilities.
  - Conduct research on implications of credit cycles and real estate booms and busts for real economy and policy responses of monetary and macroprudential policies.
- Strengthening financial oversight:
  - Cooperate with the FSB and other standard setters to enhance global financial regulation and supervision.
  - Participate in designing revisions to standards and assessment methodologies.
  - In FSAPs, bilateral surveillance, and technical assistance, assess and facilitate members’ adherence to international standards and evaluate impact of regulatory reform agenda, including Basel II/III requirements.
  - Identify intended and unintended macroeconomic consequences of the reform agenda.
- Managing capital flows:
  - Develop a balanced and flexible approach to managing capital flows to reap benefits of capital mobility while limiting risks.
  - A series of papers has been presented to the Board to inform policy design as called for by the IMFC.
- Assessing vulnerabilities in nonbank financial institutions:
  - Develop methodologies for assessing vulnerabilities in nonbank financial institutions and markets (for example, stress testing tools for insurance).
  - FSAPs increasingly focus on potential systemic risks from financial market infrastructures.
- Promoting financial sector deepening:
  - Explore links between financial stability and economic growth, and challenges and opportunities from financial deepening and inclusion, particularly in low-income countries.
  - Technical assistance is geared toward capacity building alongside carefully sequenced liberalization.

*IMF — Excerpt: "Mandate: The Fund has the responsibility to ensure the effective operation of the international monetary system" (content unit).*

### 9.      As the Fund’s interactions with its membership are mainly bilateral in nature, its main

### _041012 - 9.      As the Fund’s interactions with its membership are mainly bilateral in nature, its main

### Bilateral interactions and global stakeholders
- The Fund’s main counterparts are national authorities (including central banks and financial supervisory agencies); interactions are two-way: disseminating the Fund’s analysis and policy advice and learning from members’ experience.
- Beyond national authorities, the Fund’s financial surveillance work involves close collaboration with global stakeholders:
  - The G-20
    - The Fund works with the G-20 to assess members’ success in meeting commitments in the Cannes Action Plan, including financial sector reforms and steps to avoid disruptive deleveraging.
    - The Fund draws on the FSB’s monitoring of the implementation of agreed G-20 financial reforms.
  - The FSB
    - Missions overlap but approaches have been complementary, leveraging comparative advantages and generating synergies.
    - As laid out in the 2008 joint letter, the Fund is responsible for surveillance of the global financial system and the policies of its members, and assesses macrofinancial risks and systemic vulnerabilities; the FSB leads in elaboration of international financial sector supervisory and regulatory policies and standards, coordination of standard setting bodies, and assessment of financial system vulnerabilities.
    - The IMF and the FSB conduct jointly the Early Warning Exercise and collaborate on special projects on a case-by-case basis, such as the joint report to the G-20 on macroprudential policy frameworks.
    - The Fund is working with the FSB on filling data and information gaps exposed by the recent crisis and is supporting other FSB activities, such as peer reviews and the initiative to promote adherence to cooperation and information exchange standards.
    - As a member of the FSB, the Fund brings an independent and unique perspective reflecting the interests of its entire membership.
    - The experience to date provides a solid foundation for close collaboration, though modalities may need to evolve in light of the G-20 call for strengthening the FSB’s capacity, resources, and governance.
    - Footnote: The Fund―like other international financial institutions―has clarified that it is not bound to support any decisions that are inconsistent with its own legal and policy framework. This is particularly important regarding the FSB’s cooperation and information exchange initiative, under which the Fund does not participate in decisions regarding the listing of non-cooperative jurisdictions and the adoption of negative measures relating to those jurisdictions that are not in accordance with the Fund’s legal framework and policies.
  - Standard setters
    - The IMF cooperates in development and monitoring of international standards and brings the perspective of its universal membership, FSAPs, and general surveillance work.
    - The Fund is itself a standard setter in data compilation and dissemination and transparency in fiscal, monetary, and financial policies.
    - The Fund assesses compliance with all core international financial sector standards through ROSCs, conducted in cooperation with the World Bank in developing and emerging market countries.
  - The World Bank
    - The Fund cooperates with the World Bank in FSAPs in developing and emerging market countries—the Bank focuses on development issues and the Fund on stability—with the goal of supporting durable economic growth and financial inclusion.
    - FSAPs in advanced economies are carried out exclusively by the Fund.
    - The Fund coordinates with the Bank in providing technical assistance on financial sector issues and debt management support (through the Medium-Term Debt Strategy).
  - Financial market participants
    - Through the Financial Institutions Consultative Group and other consultative bodies, the Fund engages in informal dialogue with private international financial market participants on the impact of new regulatory measures and risks to global financial stability.
    - The Fund seeks views of financial market participants in regular bilateral and multilateral activities.

### The Managing Director’s Action Plan for Surveillance — strengthening financial sector coverage
- The Action Plan includes steps to integrate macrofinancial linkages and financial sector issues into regular surveillance:
  - Increased use of financial sector expertise in Article IV consultations
    - Assign a financial expert to each Article IV team for countries with systemically important financial sectors (for which stability assessments under the FSAP are mandatory) and for countries with mounting financial vulnerabilities.
  - Deepening financial sector analysis in bilateral surveillance
    - Internal training is being stepped up and good practices disseminated more widely.
    - Cross-country lessons are being drawn from recent FSAPs.
    - In bilateral surveillance, FSAP recommendations will be tracked systematically and progress reported regularly.
    - Research on implications of credit cycles and real estate boom and busts will be incorporated into regular surveillance work.
    - The forthcoming External Sector Reports will include an analysis of capital flows.
  - Improving availability of financial sector information
    - Data availability remains a constraint to better macrofinancial analysis; there is a need to ensure financial sector data inadequacies are reported more candidly.
    - The TSR found that only 5 reports out of 50 reported any data shortcomings in this area.
    - The next Review of Data Provision to the Fund for Surveillance Purposes has been brought forward to 2012 to examine this issue.
    - The Fund is cooperating with national authorities and multilateral bodies to promote better data on globally systemically important financial institutions.
  - Modernizing the legal framework
    - An integrated surveillance decision, discussed as a follow up to the Triennial Surveillance Review, would clarify the importance of focusing on global economic and financial stability and enable surveillance to focus on non-balance of payments spillovers.
  - Adopting a financial sector surveillance strategy
    - The strategy would cover objectives and instruments of the Fund’s surveillance over the global financial system, countries’ implementation of financial sector and macroprudential policies, work on macro-financial linkages, and the relationship with other global stakeholders.
    - The present paper is the first step toward this strategy.

### Policy papers, meetings, and selected bibliography (high-level inventory)
- Preliminary outline of key Board policy papers and topical areas (as reflected in the tables and lists):
  - Coordination of Monetary and Macroprudential Policies
  - Report on Progress with TSR Recommendations
  - Spillover Reports
  - Review of Data Provision
  - LICs: Financial Deepening and Macro-stability
  - Cross-Cutting Lessons of FSAPs
  - Modalities for Cross-Border Resolution
  - Rethinking the Role of Standards Assessments in Assessing Financial Stability
  - Revised Surveillance Guidance Note
  - G-20 Data Gaps Update
  - External Sector Report
- Recent and relevant IMF policy and other papers (selected titles preserved exactly as in source):
  - 2011 Triennial Surveillance Review, October 31, 2011
  - Analytics of Systemic Crises and the Role of Global Financial Safety Nets; IMF Policy Paper; May 31, 2011
  - Integrating Stability Assessments Under the Financial Sector Assessment Program into Article IV Surveillance; IMF Policy Paper; August 27, 2010
  - Financial Sector Surveillance and the Mandate of the Fund; IMF Policy Paper; March 19, 2010
  - The Financial Sector Assessment Program After Ten Years: Experience and Reforms for the Next Decade; IMF Policy Paper; August 28, 2009
  - Long-Term Investors and Their Asset Allocation: Where Are They Now? GFSR Chapter II, October 2011
  - Toward Operationalizing Macroprudential Policies: When to Act? GFSR Chapter III, September 2011
  - How to Address the Systemic Part of Liquidity Risk, GFSR Chapter II, April 2011
  - Housing Finance and Financial Stability—Back to Basics? GFSR Chapter III, April 2011
  - Systemic Liquidity Risk: Improving the Resilience of Institutions and Markets, GFSR Chapter II, September 2010
  - The Uses and Abuses of Sovereign Credit Ratings, GFSR Chapter III, September 2010
  - Systemic Risk and the Redesign of Financial Regulation, GFSR Chapter II, April 2010
  - Making Over-the-Counter Derivatives Safer: The Role of Central Counterparties, GFSR Chapter III, April 2010
  - Managing Sovereign Debt and Debt Markets through a Crisis—Practical Insights and Policy Lessons; IMF Policy Paper; April 18, 2011
  - Institutional Models for Macroprudential Policy; SDN/11/18; November 1, 2011
  - Macroprudential Policy: An Organizing Framework; IMF Policy Paper; March 14, 2011
  - Policies for Macrofinancial Stability: Options to Deal with Real Estate Booms; SDN/11/02; February 25, 2011
  - Macroprudential policy tools and frameworks Update to G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors; 14 February 2011
  - Macroprudential Policy: What Instruments and How to Use Them? Lessons from Country Experiences; IMF Working Paper 11/238; October 1, 2011
  - The Multilateral Aspects of Policies Affecting Capital Flows, SM/11/277 (October 13, 2011)
  - The Effectiveness of Capital Controls and Prudential Policies in Managing Large Inflows; SDN/11/14; August 5, 2011
  - Managing Capital Inflows: What Tools to Use? SDN/11/06; April 5, 2011
  - Recent Experiences in Managing Capital Inflows—Cross-Cutting Themes and Possible Policy Framework; IMF Policy Paper; February 14, 2011
  - The IMF's Role Regarding Cross-Border Capital Flows; IMF Policy Paper; November 15, 2010
  - Capital Inflows: The Role of Controls; SPN/10/04; February 19, 2010
  - Report on the Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors on Financial Stability Issues in Emerging Market and Developing Economics (EMDE), November 3, 2011
  - Managing Volatility in Low-Income Countries: The Role and Potential for Contingent Financial Instruments; IMF Policy Paper; October 31, 2011
  - The Too-Important-to-Fail Conundrum: Impossible to Ignore and Difficult to Resolve; SDN/11/12; May 27, 2011
  - Subsidiaries or Branches: Does One Size Fit All? SDN/11/04; March 7, 2011
  - Impact of Regulatory Reforms on Large and Complex Financial Institutions; SPN/10/16; November 3, 2010
  - Shaping the New Financial System; SPN/10/15; October 3, 2010
  - Redesigning the Contours of the Future Financial System; SPN/10/10; August 16, 2010
  - A Fair and Substantial Contribution by the Financial Sector, G-20 Toronto Summit, Toronto, Canada, June 26-27, 2010
  - The Making of Good Supervision: Learning to Say “No”; SPN/10/08; May 18, 2010
  - Crisis Management and Resolution: Early Lessons from the Financial Crisis; SDN/11/05; March 9, 2011
  - Resolution of Cross-Border Banks—A Proposed Framework for Enhanced Coordination; IMF Policy Paper; June 11, 2010
  - Exiting from Crisis Intervention Policies; IMF Policy Paper; February 4, 2010
  - Crisis-Related Measures in the Financial System and Sovereign Balance Sheet Risks; July 31, 2009
  - The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps, Implementation Progress Report; Prepared by the IMF Staff and the FSB Secretariat, June 2011
  - Understanding Financial Interconnectedness; Prepared by the IMF's SPR and MCM Departments with the Statistics Department, October 4, 2010
  - The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps-Progress Report, Action Plans and Timetables; Prepared by the IMF Staff and the FSB Secretariat, May 2010
  - The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps: Report to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors; Prepared by the IMF Staff and the FSB Secretariat October 29, 2009

*Source: _041012 - 9.      As the Fund’s interactions with its membership are mainly bilateral in nature, its main*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2012/_041012.pdf_