In November 2014, the Managing Director set out a five-year Action Plan for Strengthening Surveillance in line with the goals of the 2014 Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR). In response to Executive Directors’ request for an early update, this report outlines the initial steps taken to operationalize the Action Plan. Many initiatives will take time to be fully embedded in the Fund’s surveillance products and its day-to-day dialogue with member countries. This initial phase focused on putting in place the building blocks to support teams engaging in surveillance. This includes revising guidance to staff in line with the TSR priorities, investing in tools and staff training to boost capacity, and revamping work practices. Ongoing engagement among staff will be critical, both to raise awareness and to understand the issues teams are facing. Managers will play a vital role in implementing changed work practices, and the new leadership framework will support this. While not all initiatives are equally advanced given their different starting points or varying complexity, work is moving forward in all three of the broad pillars of the TSR: Deepening risk and spillover analysis. Staff is making a concerted effort to develop new approaches to macrofinancial surveillance, including through area department led pilot cases, enhanced technical support from functional departments, and a more collaborative approach to build skills and share knowledge. More tailored and expert policy advice. To better adapt our advice to the changing needs of member countries, staff is laying the groundwork for more detailed and tailored macro-structural analysis and ensuring that our fiscal advice continues to be ‘state of the art’. Efforts to leverage cross-country experience have gained momentum. Achieving greater impact. Staff is promoting more client focused communication, including exploring ways for more effective two-way dialogue with member countries, and promoting greater clarity in its multilateral messages. Staff is also developing principles to better understand and address perceptions of evenhandedness.

The 2014 review of surveillance comes at a critical juncture for the Fund and its member countries. Policymakers are navigating a brittle, uneven recovery that is still marred by the lingering effects of the crisis. They are also continuing to adapt to the challenges of a highly interconnected world, shielding their economies from potential negative spillovers while also striving to harness the benefits of globalization. It is imperative that Fund surveillance is positioned to help our members best chart this course. This paper presents specific proposals in the priority areas agreed in the 2014 Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR). These actions will help ensure that surveillance meets the current and future needs of the membership, and the wider global economic community.

This is a high-level report on progress in addressing recurring issues identified by the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO). The Board endorsed the proposal in the Chairman’s Summing Up for the Independent Evaluation Office Report on Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation – Lessons for the IMF (BUFF/14/58, 6/11/14) that staff prepare a separate high-level report on the status of initiatives that address the recurring issues identified by the IEO, noting that the first staff report could be prepared within two years, followed by similar reports every five years thereafter. The September 2015 Management Implementation Plan set out the actions management would take to follow-up on the Board-endorsed recommendation. The IEO’s 2014 evaluation of Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF identified five recurring issues: a) Executive Board guidance and oversight; b) Organizational silos; c) Attention to risks and uncertainty; d) Country and institutional context; and e) Evenhandedness. This high-level report provides a broad account of actions taken to address these recurring issues since the publication of the 2014 IEO report; it is not intended as an exhaustive account of initiatives undertaken. Takeaways. The report concludes that the Fund has made progress in addressing the recurring issues identified by the IEO, and acknowledges the need for taking actions on an ongoing basis to achieve the related objectives. The discussion of the Management Implementation Plan (MIP) left open the question of whether subsequent reports should be prepared, perhaps every five years. The Evaluation Committee concluded that the forthcoming external evaluation of the IEO could look at the monitoring mechanisms more holistically, to provide further input into considering whether or not to continue the preparation every five years of this high-level report.

This paper sets out Management’s response to the Independent Evaluation Office’s (IEO) evaluation of IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis. The implementation plan proposes specific actions focusing on the three of the four recommendations that received broad support from the Executive Board, namely (i) ensuring that the IMF as a quota-based institution has sufficient resources to contribute to future crisis resolution; (ii) developing guidelines for structuring engagements with other organizations, and (iii) consolidating and simplifying the current framework to identify and assess risks and vulnerabilities. Some of the proposed actions to address the Board-endorsed IEO recommendations are underway as part of the 2014 Triennial Surveillance Report (TSR) Action Plan, the FY2016–18 Medium-Term Budget and the ongoing efforts to ratify the 2010 Quota and Governance Reforms. The paper also explains how implementation will be monitored.

The WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism, which reviews the trade policies and practices of each WTO member at regular intervals, is generally considered to function well. In this day and age, complacency is unwise. Examining trade policy reviews throughout the lifetime of the TPRM, this book details its evolution from Article X of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade to the proposed modifications resulting from the mechanism's latest appraisal, examining the budgetary capabilities and technical performance of all the main entities who participate in the reviews. On the basis of these considerations, the author concludes that in order to remain relevant, especially in times of increased global protectionism, the TPRM could, and should do better, and provides unique and timely suggestions for reform.

The Fund has made good progress over the past two years in integrating macrofinancial analysis into Article IV surveillance for a wide range of members. Building on past work to enhance financial sector analysis, Fund staff has sought to develop a consistent and forward-looking view on how the financial sector affects each member’s economic outlook with the aim of strengthening staff’s capacity to provide advice on macro-critical questions. The focus has been on developing a fuller understanding of macrofinancial linkages, and applying this analysis to inform policy advice. Staff has sought to articulate the role of the financial sector in the macroeconomic baseline, and to integrate the financial sector into the risk assessment, taking into account both the impact of macro shocks on the financial sector as well as the effect of financial shocks on macroeconomic stability. Strengthening the analytical foundations of this work has helped staff provide advice in all policy areas, including financial sector policies. Staff has tailored macrofinancial analysis to the circumstances of a diverse set of economies. Area departments have taken the lead in selecting 66 economies for enhanced macrofinancial coverage and in identifying topics, drawing on targeted support from functional departments. The choice of coverage has included legacies from the global financial crisis—such as deleveraging and stretched balance sheets in advanced economies and some emerging markets—and more recent challenges such as commodity price shocks, especially in low income countries, and the risks of housing booms. The financial sector’s contribution to growth and inclusion has become an important question in countries across all income groups. Staff sees benefits in mainstreaming this approach across the membership, while continuing to address analytical gaps and adapting to new challenges. The work of the past two years has underscored the criticality of macrofinancial analysis for a diverse range of members, and laid the basis for progressively mainstreaming macrofinancial surveillance across the membership. Building on this progress, staff sees scope for the Fund to deepen its understanding of the macroeconomic effects of financial shocks, to better adapt microprudential and macroprudential policy advice with an assessment of macro-critical risks including systemic risk, and to deepen the analysis of outward spillovers. Staff will also need to continue to adapt the focus of analysis and tools, and seek relevant data, as economic challenges evolve.

"The Ninth Periodic Monitoring Report (PMR) on the Status of Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) in Response to Board-Endorsed Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) Recommendations assesses the progress made over the last year on actions contained in two “new” MIPs arising from recent IEO evaluations, and another seven for which individual management actions were classified as “open” in the Eighth PMR. Overall, 42 of the 96 actions included in the Ninth PMR remain open, representing roughly the same proportion as the previous PMR. A 25 percent net increase in open management actions over the past year is accounted for by 24 new actions from two MIPs, and 16 actions that have been implemented over the period. There is positive traction on the last four MIPs, but older actions appear challenging to implement. Better progress has been made with the implementation of the actions contained in recent MIPs. Fourteen of the actions implemented since the Eighth PMR relate to MIPs approved after October 2015, while only two actions (out of 24) from earlier MIPs were implemented. Improvements in the follow-up process approved by the Board in October 2015 have contributed to speedier implementation of recent actions, but some challenges remain. There are lingering challenges with defining measures of success for numerous actions, but accountabilities are now clearer and many actions are at advanced stages at the time of the Board’s discussion of the MIPs. This PMR introduces indicators to support the process for resolving challenges with long-standing actions. Despite the slower progress with the older actions, significant advances have been made over the past year in several key areas. These include: protocols for engaging the IEO; risk management and analysis; the mainstreaming of macrofinancial surveillance; an overarching strategy on data and statistics; guidance on cooperation with other organizations, including Regional Financing Arrangements (RFAs); improvements in External Stability Assessments; and ongoing analytical work on surveillance and program, including macrostructural issues, emerging topics, and debt sustainability analysis. On the other hand, progress has been slower on macro forecasting, outward spillovers, and cross-country knowledge sharing."