A review of progress in the reform of the international financial arquitecture since the Asian crisis

• Autores: Miguel de las Casas, Santiago Fernández de Lis, Emiliano González Mota, Clara Mira Salama
• Localización: Documentos ocasionales - Banco de España, ISSN 1696-2222, Nº. 7, 2004, págs. 1-81
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • The objective of this paper is to evaluate progress in the reform of the International Financial Architecture (IFA) over the period 1998-2003, taking as starting point the debate triggered by the Asian crisis, which led to a profound reconsideration of the main aspects of IFA. The three reports produced in 1998 by a group of systemically relevant economies (dealing with transparency, crisis prevention and resolution, and strengthening financial systems) are taken as a benchmark. The assessment is based on (i) objective indicators of progress where they exist (which often require in any case a certain degree of interpretation) and (ii) a survey conducted between November 2003 and March 2004, through a questionnaire sent to a number of government and international organisation officials, private-sector representatives and academics. The main conclusions of the paper indicate that progress in the reform of IFA since 1998 seems modest, despite the numerous initiatives taken. Progress seems greater in the areas of strengthening the financial sector and transparency, whereas it is significantly less in crisis prevention and, especially, in crisis resolution. As a result, crises are not seen to be less likely over recent years and improvements in recovering market access after a crisis by affected countries are not acknowledged. A few key ideas seem to emerge from theses results with regard the future reform agenda: perseverance is necessary for most reforms to be effective in terms of reducing the likelihood and cost of crises. Poor implementation of reforms is often at the root of the problems. Enhanced monitoring of the implementation process would probably be needed in certain areas. A clarification of crisis resolution strategies seems to be needed. More clarity in debt restructuring processes would be particularly welcome and would probably improve the recovery of market access after a crisis.