This evaluation assesses how well IMF-supported programs helped to sustain economic growth while delivering adjustment needed for external viability over the period 2008–19. The evaluation finds that the Fund’s increasing attention to growth in the programs has delivered some positive results. Specifically, it does not find evidence of a consistent bias towards excessive austerity in IMF-supported programs. Indeed, programs have yielded growth benefits relative to a counterfactual of no Fund engagement and boosted post-program growth performance. Notwithstanding these positive findings, program growth outcomes consistently fell short of program projections. Such shortfalls imply less protection of incomes than intended, fuel adjustment fatigue and public opposition to reforms, and jeopardize progress towards external viability. The evaluation examines how different policy instruments were applied to support better growth outcomes while achieving needed adjustment. Fiscal policies typically incorporated growth-friendly measures but with mixed success. Despite some success in promoting reforms and growth, structural conditionalities were of relatively low depth and their potential growth benefits were not fully realized. Use of the exchange rate as a policy tool to support growth and external adjustment during programs was quite limited. Lastly, market debt operations were useful in some cases to restore debt sustainability and renew market access, yet sometimes were too little and too late to deliver the intended benefits. The evaluation concludes that the IMF should seek to further enhance program countries’ capacity to sustain activity while undertaking needed adjustment during the program and to enhance growth prospects beyond the program. Following this conclusion, the report sets out three recommendations aimed at strengthening attention to growth implications of IMF-supported programs, including the social and distributional consequences.
The Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) has produced a detailed report that provides valuable insights on how the IMF responded to the global financial and economic crisis. The analysis in the report is broadly balanced, and Managing Director welcomes the IEO’s finding that the IMF played an important role in the global response to the crisis, and broadly supports the report’s recommendations
The Managing Director welcomes the IEO's novel report, which identifies recurring issues from past evaluations and assesses progress in addressing them. The report's focus on organizational silos, attention to risks and uncertainty, country and institutional context, evenhandedness, and Executive Board guidance and oversight is appropriate given their relevance and importance for the effectiveness and credibility of IMF operations.
This management implementation plan (MIP) proposes actions in response to the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO)’s report on growth and adjustment in IMF-supported programs. The full implementation of the MIP package will help ensure that, at a time when many countries face strong headwinds, IMF-supported programs not only deliver necessary adjustment to address balance of payments needs but also pay greater attention to their growth effects. While the policy-related deliverables are already incorporated into current departmental work plans and budgets, the operational implementation of these recommendations may require mobilizing additional resources.
The IEO evaluation contains a wealth of analysis and background material that will be invaluable as staff embarks on the preparation of the 2023 CD Strategy Review. The overall assessment is very positive, highlighting the achievements authorities have made with the help of Fund CD and the value they continue to place on this area of Fund work. The report also acknowledges the significant strides that have been made in improving governance and management of CD in recent years.
I welcome the report of the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) on the IMF and Fragile States. The report recognizes that the Fund has made important contributions in restoring macroeconomic stability, building core institutions, and catalyzing donor support across a diverse range of countries in fragile and conflict situations. The IEO’s analysis and findings provide a thorough stock-taking and resonate with staff. Accordingly, I broadly support the IEO’s recommendations to make the Fund’s engagement with countries in fragile and conflict situations more impactful.
The report and its recommendations should also be careful to not impinge upon areas that are still unfolding, such as the RST, crisis response, and CD provision, to avoid unnecessary duplication of efforts and ensure that a coherent and evenhanded framework is in place. I offer qualified and/or partial support to the recommendations, as discussed below, to serve better our SDS members.