The Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office — The IMF and Climate Change

Policy Papers, June 5, 2026

Source details

Canonical URL: The Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office — The IMF and Climate Change

Executive Directors welcomed the IEO report and its well-structured assessment of the Fund’s engagement across surveillance, lending, and capacity development.
Most Directors concurred with the report’s positive assessment that the Fund’s work on climate, anchored in members’ macroeconomic and financial frameworks, has provided high value for the membership and the Global Climate Architecture.
The initial phase of implementation involved upfront investment costs and significant institutional learning, with efficiency improving over time as capabilities, organization, and coordination strengthened.
Most Directors agreed there is scope to further strengthen the application of the new climate approach and supported the IEO’s key recommendations for improvement, with some qualifications on specific suggestions.
Directors emphasized resource constraints and the resulting need for prioritization in implementing recommendations.

Upfront investment costs and significant institutional learning characterized the initial phase of implementation.
Over time, efficiency improved as:
- capabilities strengthened;
- organization improved; and
- coordination strengthened.
Most Directors stressed the need for sustained institutional support to preserve progress achieved with the new approach.

Directors highlighted the need for close alignment with current and upcoming workstreams, including:
- the Comprehensive Surveillance Review (CSR);
- the Review of Program Design and Conditionality;
- the Financial Sector Assessment Program Review; and
- the Review of the Resilience and Sustainability Trust (RST).
Some challenges identified are common across multiple workstreams, reinforcing the need for coordination and prioritization given resource constraints.

General agreement that the Fund’s climate work provides high value when anchored in macroeconomic and financial frameworks.
Support for the IEO’s key recommendations was broad but included qualifications regarding specific suggestions, reflecting a desire to tailor implementation to resource and mandate considerations.

A few Directors considered that the climate strategy might have crowded out the Fund’s core work and that the evaluation should have assessed its consistency with the Fund’s mandate.
However, most Directors prioritized sustaining institutional support for the climate approach to preserve the progress achieved.

Source: The Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office — The IMF and Climate Change, June 5, 2026.