This paper reviews the experience with the joint IMF-World Bank Debt Sustainability Framework for low-income countries, including cooperation between the staffs, and highlights the implications of the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative.
This paper reviews the experience with the joint IMF-World Bank Debt Sustainability Framework for low-income countries, including cooperation between the staffs, and highlights the implications of the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative.
In April 2006, the Executive Boards of the Bank and the Fund reviewed the debt sustainability framework (DSF) for low-income countries and the implications of the multilateral debt relief initiative. Directors thought that the DSF was broadly appropriate and that no major changes were warranted, but saw scope for additional guidance on the application of the framework in a context where the apparent borrowing space created by debt relief raises new challenges in terms of policy advice. Most Directors supported a case-by-case approach for assessing the appropriate pace of debt accumulation in countries with debt below the DSF thresholds, but requested the development of specific recommendations on the implementation of such a case-by-case approach.
The objective of the joint Fund-Bank debt sustainability framework for low-income countries is to support LICs in their efforts to achieve their development goals without creating future debt problems. Countries that have received debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) need to be kept on a sustainable track. Under the framework, country DSAs are prepared jointly by Bank and Fund staff, with close collaboration between the two staffs on the design of the macroeconomic baseline, alternative scenarios, the debt distress rating, and the drafting of the write-up.
The Debt Sustainability Framework for Low-income Countries (LIC DSF) has been the cornerstone of assessments of risks to debt sustainability in LICs. The framework classifies countries based on their assessed debt-carrying capacity, estimates threshold levels for selected debt burden indicators, evaluates baseline projections and stress test scenarios relative to these thresholds, and then combines indicative rules and staff judgment to assign risk ratings of external debt distress. The framework has demonstrated its operational value since the last review was conducted in 2012, but there are areas where new features can be introduced to enhance its performance in assessing risks. Against the backdrop of the evolving nature of risks facing LICs, both staff analysis and stakeholder feedback suggest gaps in the framework to be addressed. Complexity and lack of transparency have also been highlighted as causes for concern. This paper proposes a set of reforms to enhance the value of the LIC DSF for all users. In developing these reforms, staff has been guided by two over-arching principles: a) the core architecture of the DSF—model-based results complemented by judgment—remains appropriate; and b) reforms should ensure that the DSF maintains an appropriate balance by providing countries with early warnings of potential debt distress without unnecessarily constraining their borrowing for development.
In April 2006, the Executive Boards of the Bank and the Fund reviewed the debt sustainability framework (DSF) for low-income countries and the implications of the multilateral debt relief initiative. Directors thought that the DSF was broadly appropriate and that no major changes were warranted, but saw scope for additional guidance on the application of the framework in a context where the apparent borrowing space created by debt relief raises new challenges in terms of policy advice. Most Directors supported a case-by-case approach for assessing the appropriate pace of debt accumulation in countries with debt below the DSF thresholds, but requested the development of specific recommendations on the implementation of such a case-by-case approach.
The Bank-Fund Debt Sustainability Framework (DSF) is a standardized framework for analyzing debt-related vulnerabilities in low-income countries (LICs). It aims to help countries monitor their debt burden and take early preventive action, to provide guidance to creditors in ensuring their lending decisions are consistent with countries’ development goals, and to improve the Bank and Fund’s assessments and policy advice. The DSF was last reviewed in 2006, and a reconsideration of some aspects of the framework is timely.
The history of debt relief goes back several decades. It reveals that a country s accumulation of unsustainable debt stems from such factors as deficiencies in macroeconomic management, adverse terms-of-trade shocks, and poor governance. Debt-relief initiatives have provided debt-burdened countries with the opportunity for a fresh start, but whether the benefits of debt relief can be preserved depends on transformations in a country s policies and institutions. In 1996, the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative was launched as the first comprehensive, multilateral, debt-relief framework for low-income countries. In 2005, the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative was established, which increased the level of debt relief provided to HIPCs. As of early 2009, assistance through these two initiatives had been committed to 35 countries and amounted to US$117 billion in nominal terms, or half of the 2007 GDP of these countries. 'Debt Relief and Beyond' assesses the implications of debt relief for low-income countries and how its benefits can be preserved and used to fight poverty. The chapter authors bring unique operational experience to their examination of debt relief, debt sustainability, and debt management. Several key questions are addressed, including, what consequences does debt relief have for poverty-reducing expenditures, growth, and access to finance? Can debt relief guarantee debt sustainability? How can debt management at all levels of government be improved? What lessons can be learned from countries that have experienced debt restructuring? Finally, this book provides sound empirical evidence using current econometric techniques.
The International Monetary and Finance Committee at its 2004 Annual Meetings called on the international community to provide assistance including “further debt relief” to low-income countries for achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It reaffirmed the Fund’s “important role” in supporting lowincome countries and called on the Fund to consider “further debt relief and its financing.” More impetus for this request was provided by various recent proposals (summarized in Annex I). At their meeting in London in February, G7 Finance Ministers expressed their willingness to provide as much as 100 percent multilateral debt relief.
