Background Paper

This background paper reviews the development of the scope of financial stability assessments under the FSAP since the 2014 FSAP Review. The paper summarizes past experiences of such adaptation and observed trends with respect to the coverage of specific topics and then discusses possible directions to adjust the scope of future FSAPs over the next five years given the likely changes in the financial stability landscape. The paper also discusses collaboration with the World Bank as it pertains to the scope of financial stability assessments. It does not examine issues such as analytical approaches, participation, and resources, which are covered elsewhere in the FSAP Review.

The countercyclical capital buffer (CCB) was proposed by the Basel committee to increase the resilience of the banking sector to negative shocks. The interactions between banking sector losses and the real economy highlight the importance of building a capital buffer in periods when systemic risks are rising. Basel III introduces a framework for a time-varying capital buffer on top of the minimum capital requirement and another time-invariant buffer (the conservation buffer). The CCB aims to make banks more resilient against imbalances in credit markets and thereby enhance medium-term prospects of the economy—in good times when system-wide risks are growing, the regulators could impose the CCB which would help the banks to withstand losses in bad times.

A key criterion for judging the success of the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) is the extent to which the program has enhanced the IMF’s engagement with policymakers and influenced country policies. This reflects the fact that achieving one of the program’s key objectives—reducing the frequency and severity of financial crises—rests on its ability to encourage policy action by country authorities, either directly or through other bilateral and multilateral activities. The “traction” of FSAPs thus reflects the degree to which the program is seen as useful by the authorities and the effect it has in shaping the domestic policy agenda. And the impact that the FSAP may have on wider domestic and international audiences.

This paper provides background information to the main Board paper, “The Role and Limits of Unconventional Monetary Policy.” This paper is divided in five distinct sections, each focused on a different topic covered in the main paper, though most relate to bond purchase programs. As a result, this paper centers on the experience of the United States Federal Reserve (Fed), the Bank of England (BOE) and the Bank of Japan (BOJ), mostly leaving the European Central Bank (ECB) aside given its focus on restoring the functioning of financial markets and intermediation. Section A explores whether bond purchase programs were effective at decreasing bond yields and, if so, through which channels. Section B goes one step further in evaluating whether bond purchase programs had—or can be expected to have—significant effects on real growth and inflation. Section C studies the spillover effects of bond purchases on both advanced and emerging market economies, using very similar methods as introduced in the first section. Section D breaks from the immediate focus on bond purchases to discuss how inflation might decrease the debt burden in advanced economies, in light of possible pressures that could fall (or be perceived to fall) on central banks. Finally, Section E discusses the possible risks of exiting given the very large central bank balance sheets.

This paper provides case studies of 13 of the largest non-UMP countries. The case studies begin with an overview of recent macro-economic developments as well as capital flow patterns during the crisis up to the first U.S. tapering announcement in May 2013. Country experiences with capital inflows are judged along five dimensions: (i) the size of capital inflows, (ii) policies used to manage inflows, (iii) external stability, measured by exchange rate overvaluation and current account deficits relative to fundamentals,2 (iv) asset price and credit market reactions, and (v) financial sector stability. Case studies mostly draw on published IMF Staff Reports for each country, as well as the 2013 Pilot External Stability Report (IMF 2013d).