Washington, DC:
On May 10, 2021, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) concluded a comprehensive review of the IMF's surveillance
activities. The 2021 Comprehensive Surveillance Review (CSR), which takes
place in the context of the global crisis resulting from the COVID-19
pandemic, provides the strategic direction for the Fund’s surveillance work
for the coming years.
The review identifies key surveillance priorities, which are informed by
the major trends impacting on the global economy. The priorities that will
guide the IMF surveillance are confronting risks and uncertainties,
preempting and mitigating spillovers, fostering economic sustainability and
a unified approach to policy advice. The priorities should better position
Fund engagement and policy advice to help the membership confront the
challenges posed by the emerging macrofinancial landscape. The review aims to strengthen the practice of Fund surveillance by
making it more timely, topical, targeted, interconnected, and better
informed.
The CSR’s main findings on trends, policy challenges, surveillance
priorities are reflected in the
Overview Paper, while the paper on
Modalities for Modernizing Surveillance
outlines how surveillance will change in practice.
The Fund’s comprehensive surveillance review builds on extensive background
work, including in-depth analysis of
Confronting Risks and Uncertainties
,
Preempting and Mitigating Spillovers, and
Ensuring Economic Sustainability. Additional background papers are dedicated to
Integrating Climate Change into Article IV Consultations and
Systemic Risk and Macroprudential Policy Advice in Article IV
Consultations. The review was further informed by analysis on the
Traction of Fund advice,
Scenario Planning
exercises that informed the priorities, and a report on the
Stakeholder Surveys.
Executive Board Assessment
Executive Directors broadly agreed with the main conclusions of the
Comprehensive Surveillance Review (CSR). They noted that the CSR will serve
as a blueprint for Fund surveillance to help the membership navigate the
challenges of the next five-to-ten years, informing forthcoming work on
capital flows, climate change, and data, among other issues. Directors
agreed that Fund surveillance needs to be better interconnected, more
timely, topical, and targeted, and welcomed the CSR’s ambitions to
modernize surveillance modalities.
Directors agreed with the CSR’s assessment that a macroeconomic landscape
characterized by elevated uncertainties about the recovery from the
COVID-19 pandemic will create difficult trade-offs for policymakers as they
seek to achieve inclusive and sustainable growth and stability. Important
trends—in digital technology, climate change, inequality, demographics, and
geopolitics—affecting economic sustainability will also present
opportunities and challenges and, where macro-critical, will need to be
incorporated in the Fund’s surveillance.
Directors agreed with the four proposed surveillance priorities:
Confronting risks and uncertainties.
Directors generally welcomed better integrating risks and uncertainties in
the Fund’s surveillance, including by increasing the emphasis on the range
of potential outcomes relative to the baseline and offering more contingent
policy advice, although some Directors cautioned against making
surveillance excessively risk-centric. Directors welcomed the emphasis on
clearer communication on risks, although the communications should be
carefully framed to avoid unintended consequences.
Pre-empting and mitigating adverse spillovers. Directors agreed that the Fund should continue to strengthen its work on
spillovers, drawing on better data, tools, and information-sharing
frameworks, while strengthening the dialogue with the membership. Directors
broadly agreed that the Spillovers Tool and the Spillovers Forum would help
in this regard.
Fostering economic sustainability. Directors welcomed a broader focus on sustainability, which can be
affected by factors such as demographics, digitalization, inequality,
socio- and geopolitical developments, and climate change under certain
circumstances. They supported incorporating the macro-financial and
distributional impacts of policies, where macro-economically relevant,
while considering country-specific political economy, and institutional and
capacity constraints. At the same time, Directors recognized the need for
Article IV consultations to remain selective and focused in their coverage
of new topics and cautioned against over-stretching Fund surveillance. They
called on the Fund to coordinate closely with other organizations and
better leverage outside expertise whenever possible.
Unified policy advice. Directors agreed that, in an environment of constrained policy space
where members may deploy multiple policy tools simultaneously, a more
unified approach to the policy mix is needed. They considered that the
completion of the Integrated Policy Framework would be helpful in this
context.
Directors underscored the importance of strengthening the traction of Fund
advice through higher quality analysis, stronger engagement on
country-specific issues, more continuous dialogue with all relevant
stakeholders, and clear communication. In this context, Directors
considered further integration of capacity development (CD) in surveillance
as a priority area, including strengthening the use of the CD country
strategies. They considered that virtual engagement could be leveraged but
stressed that in-person missions were still essential to build relations
and trust and ensure a close policy dialogue with the authorities.
Directors welcomed the novel approaches of Board engagement to enhance its
strategic role, take up cross-cutting issues in a more comprehensive
manner, and be more strategic and forward-leaning. They welcomed the Board
Country Matters Meetings (CMMs) as an instrument to focus on conjunctural
cross-country policy-relevant issues, with a few requesting opportunities
for the Board to provide input and select topics, and looked forward to
further detail on the interaction of CMMs and regular surveillance.
Directors generally supported the Granular Policy Initiative as a way to
provide more specific advice to the membership as they face new challenges.
Directors agreed that focused Article IV Consultations, with topics
selected in collaboration with the authorities and while continuing to
cover core areas, would help better balance selectivity and
comprehensiveness. In this context, Directors emphasized the need to adhere
to the principles of evenhandedness and macro-criticality. A number of
Directors stressed that more focused reports should not come at the expense
of the reports’ broad macroeconomic coverage and their use as reference
documents.
Directors agreed on the need to deepen macro-financial analysis and further
integrate it into bilateral surveillance. They called for additional
efforts in the areas of systemic risk analysis to better anchor
macroprudential policy advice. Directors agreed that Article IV staff
reports should provide a well-articulated view about systemic risk grounded
in a rigorous analysis of financial vulnerabilities. In this context, they
stressed the need for closer integration of FSAP findings and
recommendations with the Article IV Consultations. They also underscored
the need to expand macro-financial talent at the Fund, particularly in
country teams, while taking into account budget considerations. Directors
further noted that, as digital money gains prominence, Fund surveillance
should explore its potential benefits, as well as risks and spillovers.
Directors recognized the importance of a more systematic integration
into surveillance of macro-critical emerging topics, including climate
change.
They generally agreed that coverage of climate change mitigation in
Article IV consultations would be strongly encouraged for the largest
emitters of greenhouse gases. A few Directors underlined the need to
account for past emissions and the energy needs of developing countries
as they grow. Directors stressed that Fund surveillance should be open
to different policy approaches to climate change mitigation, that
coverage of climate issues in surveillance needs to be consistent with
the Fund’s surveillance mandate and in line with the Paris Agreement.
They underscored that, wherever macrocritical, climate change
adaptation and transition risk in the context of a global shift to a
low-carbon economy should be covered in Article IV reports.
Directors emphasized that better data is critical to deliver on
surveillance priorities. They looked forward to closing
critical data gaps in surveillance in the areas of public sector data,
foreign-exchange intervention data, and indicators for macrofinancial
analysis through the forthcoming review of Data Provision to the Fund with
a few Directors calling for a cautious approach to foreign-exchange
intervention data. Some Directors noted that increased data requirements
might place undue additional demands on authorities and should be balanced
against capacity considerations.
Directors welcomed the proposed flexible and gradual approach to
implementing the new modalities, which revolve around the principle of
experimentation, adaptation, and flexibility, while working within the
confines of existing formal frameworks. They looked forward to a revised
surveillance guidance note, and sought Board engagement on implementation
of modalities as well as coordination across departments in advance of the
guidance note and in the context of the semi-annual work program
discussions.
Directors recognized that modernizing surveillance might require additional
resources and that the specifics will be taken up in the context of the
Fund’s overall budget discussions.
Directors concurred that no changes to the Integrated Surveillance Decision
are required. They agreed that progress on CSR implementation will be
reassessed in about two years in the context of an interim review and that
the comprehensive review will remain on a five year-cycle.