国际货币基金组织对危机国家的贸易预测:偏见、低效及其根源

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Theo S. Eicher, Reina Kawai
{"title":"国际货币基金组织对危机国家的贸易预测:偏见、低效及其根源","authors":"Theo S. Eicher,&nbsp;Reina Kawai","doi":"10.1016/j.ijforecast.2022.07.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>External sector surveillance and stabilization are core missions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Since 1992, the IMF approved over 600 crisis country loan programs, conditional on reforms and performance targets that are contingent on IMF crisis assessments and recovery forecasts. The literature evaluating IMF crisis forecasts has primarily focused on GDP, inflation, and fiscal budgets, but IMF programs often originate with the </span>balance of payments<span><span> crises. Our evaluation of IMF imports/exports/exchange rates in crisis countries reveals a surprising dichotomy: import forecasts are largely efficient and unbiased, while exports and exchange rate forecasts exhibit substantial biases and inefficiencies. We show forecast errors in the full sample are driven by deeply flawed IMF forecasts for LICs in crisis. Fixed exchange rate<span> LICs (predominantly African franc zone countries) receive systematically inefficient import forecasts. Exchange rate forecasts for LICs with flexible exchange rates are so inefficient that they cannot outperform a naïve random walk, and over 30 percent of the forecasts cannot match the exchange rate’s directional movement during the first year of the recovery. Examining the sources of biases and inefficiencies, we highlight effects of conditionality and geopolitics that were not fully accounted for in IMF forecasts, specifically those relating to arrears (domestic and foreign), fiscal </span></span>finance (balance and credit limits), policy reforms (trade and government), (civil) wars, and elections.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":14061,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Forecasting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IMF trade forecasts for crisis countries: Bias, inefficiency, and their origins\",\"authors\":\"Theo S. Eicher,&nbsp;Reina Kawai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijforecast.2022.07.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>External sector surveillance and stabilization are core missions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Since 1992, the IMF approved over 600 crisis country loan programs, conditional on reforms and performance targets that are contingent on IMF crisis assessments and recovery forecasts. The literature evaluating IMF crisis forecasts has primarily focused on GDP, inflation, and fiscal budgets, but IMF programs often originate with the </span>balance of payments<span><span> crises. Our evaluation of IMF imports/exports/exchange rates in crisis countries reveals a surprising dichotomy: import forecasts are largely efficient and unbiased, while exports and exchange rate forecasts exhibit substantial biases and inefficiencies. We show forecast errors in the full sample are driven by deeply flawed IMF forecasts for LICs in crisis. Fixed exchange rate<span> LICs (predominantly African franc zone countries) receive systematically inefficient import forecasts. Exchange rate forecasts for LICs with flexible exchange rates are so inefficient that they cannot outperform a naïve random walk, and over 30 percent of the forecasts cannot match the exchange rate’s directional movement during the first year of the recovery. Examining the sources of biases and inefficiencies, we highlight effects of conditionality and geopolitics that were not fully accounted for in IMF forecasts, specifically those relating to arrears (domestic and foreign), fiscal </span></span>finance (balance and credit limits), policy reforms (trade and government), (civil) wars, and elections.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Forecasting\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Forecasting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207022001042\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Forecasting","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207022001042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对外部门的监督和稳定是国际货币基金组织(基金组织)的核心任务。自1992年以来,国际货币基金组织批准了600多个危机国家贷款项目,条件是改革和绩效目标,这些目标取决于国际货币基金组织的危机评估和复苏预测。评估国际货币基金组织危机预测的文献主要集中在GDP、通货膨胀和财政预算上,但国际货币基金组织的项目往往源于国际收支危机。我们对危机国家的IMF进口/出口/汇率的评估揭示了一个令人惊讶的二分法:进口预测在很大程度上是有效和公正的,而出口和汇率预测则表现出严重的偏差和低效。我们发现,整个样本中的预测误差是由IMF对危机中低收入国家的预测存在严重缺陷造成的。固定汇率的低收入国家(主要是非洲法郎区国家)得到的进口预测有系统地无效。采用灵活汇率的低收入国家的汇率预测效率非常低,无法优于naïve随机游走,超过30%的预测无法与复苏第一年的汇率定向运动相匹配。在审视偏见和效率低下的根源时,我们强调了IMF预测中未充分考虑到的条件限制和地缘政治的影响,特别是与拖欠(国内和国外)、财政融资(余额和信贷限额)、政策改革(贸易和政府)、(内战)战争和选举有关的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
IMF trade forecasts for crisis countries: Bias, inefficiency, and their origins

External sector surveillance and stabilization are core missions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Since 1992, the IMF approved over 600 crisis country loan programs, conditional on reforms and performance targets that are contingent on IMF crisis assessments and recovery forecasts. The literature evaluating IMF crisis forecasts has primarily focused on GDP, inflation, and fiscal budgets, but IMF programs often originate with the balance of payments crises. Our evaluation of IMF imports/exports/exchange rates in crisis countries reveals a surprising dichotomy: import forecasts are largely efficient and unbiased, while exports and exchange rate forecasts exhibit substantial biases and inefficiencies. We show forecast errors in the full sample are driven by deeply flawed IMF forecasts for LICs in crisis. Fixed exchange rate LICs (predominantly African franc zone countries) receive systematically inefficient import forecasts. Exchange rate forecasts for LICs with flexible exchange rates are so inefficient that they cannot outperform a naïve random walk, and over 30 percent of the forecasts cannot match the exchange rate’s directional movement during the first year of the recovery. Examining the sources of biases and inefficiencies, we highlight effects of conditionality and geopolitics that were not fully accounted for in IMF forecasts, specifically those relating to arrears (domestic and foreign), fiscal finance (balance and credit limits), policy reforms (trade and government), (civil) wars, and elections.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
11.40%
发文量
189
审稿时长
77 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Forecasting is a leading journal in its field that publishes high quality refereed papers. It aims to bridge the gap between theory and practice, making forecasting useful and relevant for decision and policy makers. The journal places strong emphasis on empirical studies, evaluation activities, implementation research, and improving the practice of forecasting. It welcomes various points of view and encourages debate to find solutions to field-related problems. The journal is the official publication of the International Institute of Forecasters (IIF) and is indexed in Sociological Abstracts, Journal of Economic Literature, Statistical Theory and Method Abstracts, INSPEC, Current Contents, UMI Data Courier, RePEc, Academic Journal Guide, CIS, IAOR, and Social Sciences Citation Index.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信