the imf institutecourierJanuary 2001•vol. 3

Vienna Conference Focuses on Challenges toCompleting Transition

Pamela Bradley and Roger Nord

n November 5–7, the Öster-reichische Nationalbank(OeNB) held its seventhannual East-West Confer-ence, this year with the Joint

Vienna Institute (JVI) as a cosponsor.Entitled Completing Transition: The MainChallenges, the conference drew about370 participants from ministries andcentral banks of 36 countries, as well asfrom the academia and internationalfinancial organizations.

also in this issue...

Providing economics training to officials of IMF member countries and IMF staff

The Debate on theIMF and theInternationalFinancial ArchitectureAlicia JiménezPage 3

Interview withStanley BlackFarah EbrahimiPage 5

Economic TrainingAids CountryOwnership ofProgramsLeonardo HernándezPage 7

IMF Institute atthe JVIAngel AntonayaPage 10

Samir El-Khouri

n November 18–19, senior officialsfrom Arab countries, Pakistan, andTurkey attended a high-level seminarin Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates,on globalization and economic policy-

making for countries in the region. The seminarwas organized by the IMF Institute and the Eco-nomic Policy Institute (EPI) of the Arab MonetaryFund (AMF) as part of the joint Regional Train-ing Program (RTP).

The seminar sought to raise awareness amongpolicymakers about the benefits and costs ofglobalization, the domestic policy adjustmentsneeded in face of globalization, and the lessonslearned from country experiences worldwide. Inaddition to ministers, governors, and othersenior officials who attended the seminar, AMFmanagement and staff, IMF Executive Directorsand senior staff, World Bank staff, academics,and representatives from private financial insti-tutions also attended.

See page 16

See page 18

o

oManaging National Economies in Time of Globalization

Horst Köhler, Managing Director of the IMF, delivers the keynotespeech at the conference gala dinner.

his year was a busy and successful one for the IMF Institute as we worked to fulfill ourtwofold mission: training country officials and Fund economists. At headquarters we orga-nized 23 courses and seminars for country officials of which we conducted 17, reachingnear our physical capacity in Washington. Overseas, we organized 79 training events ofwhich we conducted 47—the majority through the regional training partnerships in Abid-

jan, Abu Dhabi, China, Singapore, and Vienna. The new courses on finance and banking,designed mostly in 1999, moved onstream as part of the regular curriculum at headquartersand overseas. And the international network of regional training centers became truly worldwidewith the opening of the Joint China-IMF Training Program in June and the recent agreement

between the IMF and the Government of Brazil on theformation of a regional training center in Brasilia.Finally, in 2000 our distance learning program becameoperational, with the first course, on financial pro-gramming and policies, conducted in January for 50officials from nearly 50 countries.

Internal economics training also had a busy year. Weheld 24 courses and 46 seminars, bringing the averagenumber of economics training in the Fund to 2.9 days,from 1.2 just two years ago. To help conduct theseevents, we brought internationally recognized scholarsto teach or coordinate the courses and seminars. Sev-enty-three speakers from a broad range of universitiesand research institutions lectured in internal eco-nomics courses in 2000. And for the first time, weinvited a small number of country officials to partici-pate in selected internal economics courses as well—an experiment that proved highly successful, not only

in what it provided the country officials, but also in the added experience officials brought tothese sessions.

Finally, we reached a new high in our research output. Institute economists produced 32working papers, with many more near completion, on a broad array of topics of importance tothe Fund.

Thus, 2000 was the year in which many of the initiatives that we had undertaken over thepast several years came to fruition, bringing us to a new level in all of the core areas of ourtraining strategy: expanding overseas training, strengthening internal economics training,expanding and diversifying our curriculum to make it more responsive to the needs of countryofficials and Fund staff, and increasing the global reach of training through distance learningand technology. As the articles in this issue of the Courier show, 2000 has been busy indeed,but it has been a rewarding year for all of us here at the Institute.

Mohsin S. KhanDirector, IMF Institute

from the director

ORDERING INFORMATION:

The IMF Institute Courier is published semi-annually bythe International Monetary Fund. It is distributed toformer participants, participant sponsors, and membergovernment agencies and institutions throughout theworld at no charge. Address all correspondence to:

Carolyn RaglandDeputy Division ChiefAdministrative Division IMF Institute, Room IS2-1300, International Monetary Fund,Washington, D.C. 20431,U.S.A.

CREDITS

Editor: Farah Ebrahimi

Editorial Assistant: Myrna Bas

Design: Luisa Menjivar-Macdonald

Illustration: Massoud Etemadi

Composition: Julio R. Prego

Photography: Denio Zara, Padraic Hughes, Pedro Marquez, and Michael Spilotro.

t

Alicia Jiménez

At an October 25 seminar at the IMF Institute,Morris Goldstein, Senior Fellow at the Insti-tute for International Economics, spoke on themain findings and recommendations of severalrecent reports on the new international finan-cial architecture and reform of the IMF. Hefocused in particular on the contrasting viewsof the Meltzer Commission Report, the Councilon Foreign Relations Report, and the U.S.Treasury Report as they pertained to the lend-ing policies and practices of the Fund: specifi-cally, the interest rates and maturity on IMFloans, the size of IMF lending packages, andIMF conditionality.

IMF interest rates and loan maturityGoldstein recalled the famous Bahegot prin-

ciple that a lender of last resort should lend atpenalty rates. If interest rates are too low, bor-rowers will take excessive risks. With thatprinciple in mind, some IMF critics argue thatthe IMF loan rates are too low, providing anunwarranted subsidy that promotes excessiveborrowing and moral hazard. The IMF tookaccount of this criticism when it created theSupplemental Reserve Facility (SRF), which

charges higher inter-est rates, but

Goldstein cau-tioned that

this rate should be charged only during nor-mal periods, not crisis periods. If higher rates,such as SRF rates, were to be applied to allnonconcessional Fund loans, Goldsteinargued, the main effect would be on the speedat which countries repay the Fund, not on theamounts they borrow. “The decision to go tothe Fund is fairly price-inelastic,” he said.

Critics of the Fund also argue that thematurity and repayment periods of IMF loansare too long. The Meltzer Commission, forinstance, cited 24 member countries that havebeen in debt to the Fund in 30 of the past 50years and 46 countries that have been in debtfor 20 years or more. It proposed reducing therepayment period to 120 days, with one allow-able rollover for a maximum of 240 days.

On the other hand, the U.S. Treasury char-acterized the Meltzer Report’s position on IMFloan maturity as unrealistic, noting that in themajority of cases, countries need much longerthan four months to be in condition to repaythe Fund. In Goldstein’s view, the prolongeduse of Fund resources poses a problem, whichneeds to be addressed by shortening moder-ately the repayment period.

Size of loansNormal access limits on IMF loans are 100

percent of a country’s quota annually and 300percent cumulatively. The IMF maintains thatdifferent criteria, not the size of quotas,

The Debate on the

IMFand the

International FinancialArchitecture

should be used to evaluatethe size of rescue packages.The main concern about thesize of some recent packagesis that they contribute tomoral hazard on the lenderside. A number of reportshave called for smaller res-cue packages. Although theyrecognize that moral hazardis a problem with all insur-ance arrangements, criticsargue that the solution is toreduce the amount of pay-ment (through coinsuranceor deductibles, for example)or price the insurance moreappropriately (by charginghigher insurance rates formore risky policyholders), orboth.

IMF policy conditionalityAnother Bagehot guideline for a lender of

last resort is that lending should be done ongood collateral that has market value andthat safeguards the solvency of the lender.However, the IMF does not lend to countriesagainst collateral; rather, it lends to coun-tries that have balance of payments needsunder “adequate safeguards.” These safe-guards take the form of the “conditions” orpolicy actions that a country agrees toundertake to qualify for the loans. Thereform debate has focused mainly on fourissues related to IMF conditionality: (1) expost policy conditionality versus ex ante con-ditionality (prequalification based on somestructural conditions); (2) scope and intru-siveness of policy conditionality; (3) currencyregime and burden-sharing aspects of condi-tionality; and (4) implementation of interna-tional financial standards.

On the issue of ex post versus ex ante condi-tionality, the Meltzer report argues that theFund’s (ex post) policy conditionality “has madeIMF programs unwieldy, highly conflictive, timeconsuming to negotiate, and often ineffectual.”It recommends that countries who want to bor-row from the Fund meet requirements mainlyon banking policy and data disclosure. Othersassert that preconditions do not prevent finan-cial crises or achieve the balance of paymentsadjustment necessary to restore countries’ abil-ity to repay the Fund. Goldstein remarked thatenforcing preconditions is not the best way toqualify countries for IMF assistance. Although

meeting those conditionswould reduce the risk of get-ting into crisis, it would notbe sufficient to deter a crisis.

The scope of conditionality,noted Goldstein, is a very con-tentious issue. The criticismagainst intrusiveness coverstwo aspects—the range of poli-cies and “micromanagement.”Other critics charge that manyconditions fall outside theFund’s core competence,which is basically in the areasof monetary, exchange rate,and financial-sector policies.Asking for too many structuralconditions could result in poorcrisis management, damagethe Fund’s overall reputationfor sound analysis and advice,and run counter to a sensible

division of labor with the other internationalfinancial institutions.

In discussing the currency-regime aspect ofFund conditionality, Goldstein asserted thatamong larger emerging economies with rela-tively open capital markets, only two havebeen able to maintain a fixed exchange ratefor five years or longer: Argentina and HongKong. The main lesson from numerous experi-ences is that in most cases the best currencyprescription is to stay in a “corner,” either amanaged float (with an inflation-targetingregime) or a “hard peg” (a currency board ordollarization). This view is shared by the IMF.

Finally, Goldstein said that fear of floatingis fairly widespread among emerging coun-tries, mainly because of large currency mis-matches. If there are large unhedged dollarliabilities, depreciation can cause significantcosts for the banking and corporate sectors.Goldstein asserts that the best solution is toreduce the mismatches and to have a man-aged float regime. If this is not possible, thendollarization could be the next best solution.In the end, it all will depend on the “experi-ment” going on in Latin America. If Brazil andMexico succeed with managed floating andinflation targeting regimes, then many largercountries in the developing world will follow.However, if Argentina is able to overcome itscurrent difficulties and show good resultswith its hard peg regime, and the other coun-tries fail with their floating exchange rateregimes, countries will opt more readily fordollarization.

4

“Asking for toomany structuralconditions could

result in poor crisismanagement,

damage the Fund’soverall reputationfor sound analysis

and advice, andrun counter to a

sensible division oflabor with the

other internationalfinancial

institutions”

✒

Interview with Stanley BlackFarah Ebrahimi

s part of its resident lecturers pro-gram the IMF Institute regularlyinvites noted economic scholars toteach and conduct research at theInstitute. (See article by Roberto

Garcia-Saltos in this issue.) A current visitingscholar is Professor Stanley Black, who joinedthe Institute in July 2000 on a one-year assign-ment as Senior Policy Advisor. Professor Blackreceived his Ph. D. in economics from Yale Uni-versity and was assistant professor of eco-nomics at Princeton University and professor ofeconomics at Vanderbilt University and the Uni-versity of North Carolina, where he is currentlyGeorges Lurcy Professor of Economics. He hasserved in government with the President’sCouncil of Economic Advisors, the FederalReserve Board, and the Department of Stateand visited at numerous universities andresearch institutions. Farah Ebrahimi inter-viewed Professor Black for the Courier.

EBRAHIMI: You have had a distinguishedrecord as professor, scholar, and economicadvisor, having taught or conducted researchin some of the most prestigious universitiesand research institutions here and abroad. Asan aside, you were also the doctoral thesisadvisor for James Heckman, this year’s win-ner of the Nobel Prize in Economics. You bringto the Institute a wealth of experience. Wouldyou tell our readers about your recentresearch?

BLACK: My research interests run alongtwo lines. The first focuses on the technicalproblems of exchange rate behavior andissues relating to foreign exchange markets;the second, which is related to the first but isbroader, concerns how macroeconomic prob-lems interrelate with exchange rate regimesand monetary and fiscal policies of countriesfacing macroeconomic instability.

I am particularly interested in what hap-pens when a country switches from a peggedexchange rate to a floating exchange rate at atime of crisis. For example, when in late 1997Korea switched from a quasi-pegged exchangerate to a more floating exchange rate (thisoccurred in the context of an IMF agreement),the Korean authorities were confronted withtwo constraints. One was to minimize the rateof change of the exchange rate and the other

was to avoid running out of foreign exchange.The authorities responded by restrictingaccess to the foreign exchange market, whichmeant that the Korean won became basicallyinconvertible because it was impossible to buydollars. This event seems to have led to a sig-nificant shift in the demand for money inKorea and created a serious policy problem,which was only resolved by letting theexchange rate fluctuate more freely.

I have also been working on issues of tran-sition. This work grew from a project I did forUSAID on Mongolia about two years ago. Theproject studied the constraints on Mongolia’seconomic growth as it attempted to shift froma centrally planned to a market economy. Myfocus was on the shortcomings of the financialsystem, although the model I developed alsodealt with the whole nonagricultural economy.The country faced severe problems: manystate-owned banks with bad assets, a ricketypayments system that relied primarily on cashtransactions, mismanaged state enterprises,and outmoded infrastructure in desperateneed of modernization. My paper attempts toquantify the gains in productivity that mightaccrue if some of these areas are reformed.

5

Stanley Black, Senior Policy Advisor at the IMF Institute.

a

I am also working on a survey of work onthe portfolio theory of the exchange rate,which explains exchange rate movements bythe demand and supply of financial assets.Although a number of alternative exchangerate models have battled for recognition, nonehas succeeded. But there seems to be a revivalof interest in the portfolio approach recently,so I am surveying some of the work that hasused this method, as well as pursuing my ownwork in this area, looking at the dollar-deutsche mark and dollar-euro relationship.

Relatedly, I supervise the research of mygraduate students, and much of their workbears directly on issues of interest to theFund—for example, the sustainability of thecurrent account balance positions in CentralEuropean countries, such as Hungary andPoland; the credibility of the exchange rate-based stabilization program in Mexico; thecollapse of the European monetary systemsome years ago, and so on.

Thus, my own research and that of my stu-dents overlaps with projects that people at theFund are working on.

EBRAHIMI: Over the past two years, theInstitute has expanded its research program,making it an important and integral part of itsteaching program. You are the second seniorpolicy advisor at the Institute, the first beingPeter Montiel, who is now back at WilliamsCollege. Could you tell us about the status ofthis program?

BLACK: The program I see is very dynamic.I have certainly been surprised by the level ofwork that has been done and the number ofpapers being completed. As of fall 2000, staffwere nearing completion on 42 papers, cover-ing a truly wide range of topics—from macro-and microeconomics, to international tradeand factor movements, finance and debt,financial economics, fiscal policy, developmentand policy reform, and transition economics.

The staff are committed to teaching, butthey also value research because it enablesthem to develop their professional identitiesand to gain expertise in areas that may berelated to their teaching, either currently or inthe future. And because staff are encouragedto conduct research, we are able to draw ahigher quality of economists to the Institute.

EBRAHIMI: How has the program affectedthe course contents and the quality of theteaching?

BLACK: Despite the short time I have beenhere, I can see examples of how research ishelping to strengthen the Institute’s courses.

For example, the experiences of the Asian crisisand other related problems have made finan-cial stability a new area of emphasis for theFund. Because we have staff whose researchinterests focus on these issues, we were able toquickly modify some of our courses to includemodules on financial stability and design newcourses on financial sector issues.

EBRAHIMI: How is the research programorganized? How do staff pick their topics?

BLACK: There are no hard and fast rules,which may account for the wide range ofresearch going on at the Institute. Being inthe Fund, of course, automatically brings cer-tain issues to the fore, and individuals’ spe-cialization, intellectual curiosity, andexperience further influence their choices.

The research, however, tends to be morepolicy oriented, concerned more with immedi-ate applicability and relevance than abstrac-tion. That is probably the key differencebetween the research program I see here andthe research programs I am familiar with inthe university setting.

EBRAHIMI: Is any of the research beingdone collaboratively, for example, with stafffrom other Fund departments or outsidescholars?

BLACK: There are collaborative projectsgoing on outside the department, for examplewith short-term visitors who have come to theInstitute at the behest of a particular staffmember to work with him or her, or collabora-tive efforts with Fund staff in other depart-ments. We are trying as well to provide moreinteraction among staff across divisions toencourage them to work more collaboratively.

EBRAHIMI: What is your role as senior pol-icy advisor in shaping the research program?

BLACK: The Institute conducts a biweeklyseminar series, which I help organize. Theseseminars are open to Fund and World Bankeconomists and provide a forum for Institutestaff to present their research papers and toreceive feedback from colleagues. I also meetwith individual researchers on their projectsand review applications for visiting scholars’positions.

Mostly, my goal is to encourage the staff’sresearch activities and to help create an envi-ronment that allows them to engage inresearch. And since I have spent my life doingthis for graduate students and junior faculty,the work feels very familiar.

EBRAHIMI: Do you also have a role in theInternal Economics Program—the trainingprogram for Fund staff?

6

BLACK: When asked, I advise the trainingsection on the speakers and topics for coursesbeing planned. For example, we are currentlydiscussing next year’s program and one issuethat has come up is the need for more inter-nal training courses on financial sector prob-lems. For example, Fund staff, in conjunctionwith World Bank staff, are being sent on mis-sions to conduct Financial Sector AssessmentPrograms (FSAPs). These assessments evalu-ate whether a country has an effective pro-gram for supervising its financial institutions.And the evidence is that quite a number ofcountries, most often transition economies butothers as well, are seriously lacking in thisarea. We want to make sure that Fund staffhave all the tools they need to make theirevaluations. Internal training courses are oneway to help staff acquire the right tools. Thatis the purpose of the internal training pro-gram: to help equip Fund staff with the best

available tools in whatever area they areasked to work in.

EBRAHIMI: How does the research programat the Institute differ from or complement theresearch done elsewhere in the Fund, forexample, in the Research Department?

BLACK: The Research Department is thelocus of the research efforts of the Fund. TheInstitute has a teaching mission, and to haveeffective teachers and an effective teachingprogram requires a staff that is aware of cur-rent research issues, that is aware of currentpolicy issues, and that is in its own way tryingto grapple with those problems on a profes-sional level. That is the purpose of theresearch effort in the Institute. It helpsstrengthen the teaching enterprise by helpingus attract the best staff we can to teach andby keeping them current on the issues. I ampleased to be able to contribute to this pro-cess while I am here.

7

Leonardo Hernández

mong the many lessons learnedfrom the recent internationalfinancial crises, an old one hasgained renewed attention: theimportance of country ownership

for the success of any Fund-supported pro-gram. As a result, improving country owner-ship is now high on the IMF’s reform agenda.This means greater emphasis on country par-ticipation, both in the analysis of policyoptions and in the design of adjustment pro-grams. Although IMF Institute training hastraditionally been designed to assist membercountries in both of these areas, with theFund’s renewed emphasis on program owner-

ship the link between training in financialprogramming and the design of adjustmentprograms has become even more important.In response, the Institute has introduced twoinitiatives.

First, it has developed a new two-weekcourse on financial programming—to begin in2001—aimed at training country officials todevelop a comprehensive financial program.The course is designed to provide a unique,hands-on experience in diagnosing economicproblems, formulating policies, and simulatingpolicy outcomes. It differs from the eight-weekcourse offered at headquarters—and from thecurrent two-week course given abroad—in thatit emphasizes the hands-on exercise ratherthan the discussion of related policy issues.

Economic TrainingAids CountryOwnership of Programs

✒

a

A typical course begins with short lectureson basic macroeconomic concepts andaccounting principles, with the balance of thetime dedicated to workshops in which smallgroups of about 8 to 10 people analyze andforecast the real, fiscal, monetary, and exter-nal sectors of a particular economy. Based ontheir findings, participants next establishappropriate objectives and develop a compre-hensive adjustment program aimed at achiev-ing those objectives. The exercise is based onactual country data, and as in real life, partic-ipants are required to make policy decisionswith limited information at several stages dur-ing the design of the economic program. Byworking in small groups, participants areencouraged to become directly involved indeveloping the adjustment program and todevelop a sense of team work. The latter is animportant objective of the courses, sincepreparing an adjustment program is a teameffort requiring the expertise of officials fromdifferent government agencies.

The second initiative consists of newregional courses for participants from smallgroups of countries, especially from thosewhere the need for training is greatest.Because these courses target a few countrieswith similar economic conditions, they allowdiscussions to focus on issues of direct rele-vance to participants. They also lower thecommunication barriers imposed by the differ-

ent language and economic skills of the atten-dees, thus encouraging more active participa-tion by all. In this way, the new coursesprovide not only more effective training, butthey also train more officials from the selectedcountries, helping to build a critical mass ofexpertise in countries where it is most needed.Finally, the courses bring together groups ofofficials from different agencies in the samecountry, thereby making it easier for countriesnegotiating with the Fund to put together ateam to produce a feasible and agreeableadjustment program.

A recent course specially tailored to theneeds of four developing countries in Asia—Cambodia, Lao P.D.R., Myanmar, and Viet-nam—was conducted at the IMF-SingaporeRegional Training Institute in August 2000.Overall, participants expressed great satisfac-tion with the new format. They noted that thesmall and more homogeneous group of coun-tries made it easier for participants to expresstheir views and to discuss issues of particularrelevance to their economies. National courseshave also been offered in Vietnam and Cam-bodia and are planned for Lao P.D.R andMongolia in the near future. Similarly, a newregional course specially designed for thesmall Caribbean economies was offered inBarbados during the second half of 2000 (seearticle by Da Costa and De Masi in thisissue).

8

✒

IMF Report on Training 1998–99An in-depth report on the IMF’s economic

training activities for country officials at head-

quarters and overseas and its training activi-

ties for Fund staff for the two-year period

1998–99.

TO ORDER:

Send e-mail to insinfo@imf.org. You canalso download the report from the IMFInstitute website: www.imf.org, go to“about the IMF,” click on “IMF Institute”under Technical Assistance.

Donogh McDonald

he Joint China-IMF TrainingProgram is off to a strong start.As noted in the June issue ofthe Courier, the program wasestablished by the IMF and the

Peoples Bank of China to provide training toChinese officials involved in formulating andimplementing economic and financial policiesand compiling and analyzing statistics. Thefirst five training events were held betweenJune and December 2000, attended by morethan 200 Chinese officials. The specific eventswere as follows:• Macroeconomic Impact of the Budget and

Current Issues in Tax Policy. The Instituteheld this two-week course in Suzhou inJune. The course addressed fiscal issuesrelated to economic growth, macroeconomicstability, and income distribution. Lecturescovered the main principles of fiscal reform,expenditure and revenue policy, and fiscalforecasting, emphasizing interrelationshipsbetween public finances and other sectors.Workshops allowed participants to discussthese principles in smaller groups and toapply them in practical exercises.

• Financial Programming and Policies. TheInstitute conducted this two-week course inShanghai in August. The course addressedthe key methodological topics related toaccounting, analysis, and forecasting in themain areas of macroeconomic policy. It cov-ered issues related to capital flows and toreforms in the financial, state enterprise,and external sectors and discussed recenteconomic developments in China. It con-cluded with a financial programming exer-cise using China as a case study.

• Macroeconomic Statistics for Users. TheIMF’s Statistics Department held this three-day high-level seminar in Chongqing inAugust. The seminar focused on the use ofmacroeconomic statistics in the analysisand formulation of policy, highlighting inparticular the role of sound statisticalframeworks and the statistical links amongdifferent economic sectors.

• Foreign Exchange Market and Operations.The IMF’s Monetary and Exchange AffairsDepartment (MAE) delivered this one-weekcourse, which highlighted the best practices

that emerge from international experienceand their relevance for China. The coursecovered the development and monitoring ofthe foreign exchange market, the lessonsfrom the emerging market crises for choos-ing an exchange regime, global trends inforeign exchange markets, internationalexperiences with central bank intervention,and the links between external sector liber-alization and financial sector stability.

• International Accounting Standards forFinancial Institutions. MAE conducted thisfour-day course in Hangzhou in October.The course covered topics such as bankfinancial statements, internal control sys-tems, and accounting and controls for spe-cific aspects of bank operations, such asdeposits, investment and trading opera-tions, lending, and transactions withaffiliates.In delivering the courses, the Fund teams

drew on a number of outside experts, includ-ing officials from various agencies in China,the Central Bank of Chile, the Central Bank ofFinland, and the U.S. Federal Reserve.

For 2001, seven events are planned. Inaddition to a high-level seminar on reformingand opening china’s banking sector, the eventwill focus on money and banking statistics,monetary operations, bank supervision, finan-cial programming and policies, and foreignexchange operations.

9

Joint China-IMF Training Program in Full Swing

✒

Angel Antonaya

look at the IMF Institute’s cur-riculum at the Joint Vienna Insti-tute (JVI) since 1992 shows asteadily expanding program thathas been continually fine-tuned to

meet the needs of officials from transitioncountries. More important, it shows the grow-ing sophistication of transition economies withmarket theories and policies. While in 1992courses focused primarily on introducing offi-cials to basic market concepts and mecha-nisms, they now provide a rich array of shortand long courses tailored for officials at differ-ent levels and on such issues as trade andexchange rate policies, external debt, financialsector instruments, and the like.

Until 1998, the Institute’s flagship coursewas Macroeconomic and Analysis Policy(MAP)—a nine week comprehensive survey ofmacroeconomic analytical concepts and tech-niques, making it the longest course at theJVI. Because of high demand for the course,the IMF Institute offered it three times a year.But as transition economies’ exposure to mar-ket economics increased, the course under-went changes as well. The section on basiceconomic concepts was dropped, the macro-economic section was updated, and thecourse shortened to five weeks and offeredtwice a year instead of three. As with thelonger course, it remained very popular withpublic officials in transition countries.

As the transformation process progressed amore diverse group of transition countriesemerged, with some economies growing fasterthan others. This diversification was reflectedin the composition and backgrounds of theparticipants as well. While some participantsstill struggled with basic macroeconomic con-cepts, others were applying them regularly intheir work. It became clear that the MAP

course had to be supplemented by shorterseminars to address the needs of officialsdirectly involved in the formulation and imple-mentation of economic policies. So in 1998the IMF Institute started to diversify its offer-ings at the JVI. It added a three-week seminaron trade and exchange rate policies, particu-larly as they relate to economic adjustmentand structural reform. The same year, itadded another regional course to its curricu-lum: Techniques of Financial Analysis andPolicy, targeted to officials with little exposureto market economics and limited time to beaway from work.

Despite the success of these courses, a gapwas apparent in the curriculum: the Instituteneeded to add courses to meet the needs ofthe growing number of participants withadvanced knowledge of market economics.These officials needed training on specificpolicy issues and opportunity for dialogueand for sharing country experiences. Inresponse, the Institute developed a new high-level seminar on macroeconomic manage-ment, which was offered twice in 1999. Theseminar’s core was a set of lectures onadvanced policy issues, including fiscal,exchange rate, monetary, external debt,financial sector reform, and trade. Thecourse concluded with a short financial pro-gramming application. After the first offering,the course developers used participant sug-gestions to fine-tune the course. Theydropped the section on financial program-ming, since most of the participants hadalready been exposed to it through the MAPcourse, replacing it with a series of presenta-tions by participants on issues specific totheir respective countries. This twofoldchange—less focus on financial programmingand more emphasis on sharing country expe-riences became a feature of some of the otherseminars as well.

10

IMF Instituteat the JVI:

Keeping Up with Transition Countries

a

Roberto García-Saltos

n 1997 the IMF Institute established aVisiting Lecturers Program to bringprominent academics and policy expertsto the Institute to teach and conductresearch for periods ranging from one

week to several months. Since then, manyscholars have visited the Institute, collaborat-ing with staff economists on research projectsand bringing their special expertise to courselectures. The result is a richer menu of topicstaught in Institute courses and a more variedresearch output.

While at the Institute, visiting scholars haveworked on such topics as exchange ratearrangements, capital controls, linkagesbetween banking and currency crises, bank-ing crisis management, money and capital

market development, and financial deriva-tives, just to mention a few. (See box.)

During her stay at the Institute, for exam-ple, Magda Kandil of the University of Wiscon-sin-Milwaukee has issued three workingpapers on cost of living adjustment and busi-ness cycles, wage flexibility and economic per-formance, and the asymmetric effects ofexchange rate fluctuations. She has also lec-tured in the Macroeconomic Management andPolicies course at headquarters. She is cur-rently working on a study of demand-side sta-bilization policies, which explores the effectsof the variability of fiscal and monetaryshocks on inflation and growth in the UnitedStates.

Leonardo Auernheimer of Texas A&M Uni-versity worked with Institute economists ontwo separate research projects. The first, with

The year 2000 witnessed the consolidationof these seminars and the introduction of anew seminar on financial markets and newfinancial instruments. The new curriculumreflected the importance of financial interme-diation and financial markets in transitioneconomies. It also reflected the growingsophistication of the financial sector in anumber of transition economies. The firstoffering of the course aimed at mid- to senior-level officials in central banks and ministriesof finance. The course gave special attentionto the emergence of derivative markets and

instruments, helping participants understandthe conceptual basis of the new instruments,as well as how financial entities use them inrisk management.

As more officials receive formal training inmarket economics, demand for advancedtraining will increase, as it has been steadilyover the past several years. The Institute hasbeen responding to this growing demand, notonly with a diverse set of courses and semi-nars at the JVI, but also with nationalcourses conducted in select transition coun-tries, such as Estonia in 2000.

11

✒

Visiting Scholars Broaden the Institute’sResearch and Teaching

i

Susan George, analyzed the effects of usinginterest rates to defend a currency from spec-ulative attack. The second, with Roberto Gar-cía-Saltos, studied international debt and theprice of domestic assets, examining the role ofphysical capital as collateral for loans in mag-nifying the effects of shocks.

Roberto Steiner of Universidad de Los Andesin Colombia and Adolfo Barajas, Institute

economist, completed their study of depositbehavior and market discipline in Colombia.The study presents evidence that during1985–99 bank depositors were able to discrim-inate between sound and unsound banks.

Since November, Tomas Cosimano of theUniversity of Notre Dame and Ralph Chami,from the Institute, have been working on astudy of monetary policy under the Basel

12

Visiting Scholars During 2000Name Affiliation Topics

Leonardo Auernheimer Texas A&M University External borrowing conditions and thetransmission of shocks; interest ratedefense against speculative attack

Michael Binder University of Maryland Econometric evidence on purchasing powerparity

Stanley Black University of North Carolina Growth in transition economies; exchangerate problems

Luis Carranza Banco Continental and Economic growth and imperfect credit Pontificia Universidad marketsCatolica del Peru

Louis Chete Nigerian Institute of Social Current account sustainability: and Economic Research evidence from Nigeria

Ehsan Choudri Carleton University International trade and productivitygrowth; patterns of trade in OECDcountries

Tomas Cosimano University of Notre Dame Monetary policy and bank capitalregulations

Andrew Feltenstein Virginia Polytechnic Institute Sequencing of reforms

Kabir Hassan University of New Orleans Econometric tests on Bangladesh’s capitalmarket

Magda Kandil University of Wisconsin Cost of living adjustment; wage flexibilityand economic performance; exchange ratefluctuations; fiscal and monetary shockeffects on inflation and growth in theUnited States

Mahmood Khan Simon Fraser University Rural poverty

Kala Krishna Pennsylvania State University Transferability versus nontransferabilitywith endogenous investment choice

François Leroux Ecole des Hautes Etudes International capital markets; banking Commerciales soundness, banking and currency crises

Meher Manzur Curtin University of Empirical evidence of real interest rate Technology parity

Peter Montiel Williams College Policy response to volatile capital flows

Sergio Rebelo Northwestern University Capital controls and economic reforms

Roberto Steiner Universidad de los Andes Depositor behavior and market disciplinein Colombia

Clas Wihlborg University of Goteborg Econometric evidence on insolvency proce-dures and capital structure

Mercedes Da Costa and Paula De Masi

n August, the IMF Institute conducted atwo-week regional Financial ProgrammingCourse in Bridgetown, Barbados for 24mid-level officials from seven Caribbeancountries and two regional institutions:

the Caribbean Development Bank and theCaribbean Center for Monetary Studies. Thecourse was organized in coordination with theWestern Hemisphere Department, with on-sitetechnical and administrative support providedby the Central Bank of Barbados.

The course was distinctive in two ways.First, it was offered as part of the WesternHemisphere Department’s broader agenda toexpand relations with the Caribbean coun-tries. Known as the Caribbean Initiative, theagenda includes efforts to coordinate theprovision of technical assistance in the region,establish a regional seminar program,increase the Fund’s research work onCaribbean problems, and improve regionalsurveillance.

Many of the IMF team’s core lecturesaddressed the specific policy issues and chal-lenges facing Caribbean countries: for exam-

13

Accord. The study explains why monetary pol-icy changes can affect banks’ total capital andinfluence the resources available to fund bankloans. Finally, Sergio Rebelo of NorthwesternUniversity and Institute economist DanyangXie are working on a theoretical model to eval-uate the effects of the imposition of temporarytariffs or capital controls on countries thathave implemented trade reforms and liberal-ized capital flows.

In sum, the Institute’s Visiting LecturersProgram is helping to link the special exper-tise of academic scholars with the policy-ori-

ented work of Institute economists, thus fur-ther enhancing the effectiveness of the Insti-tute as a training center for governmentofficials. But the gain is not the Institute’salone. The scholars benefit in turn throughtheir interactions with course participants,many of whom are experienced country offi-cials directly involved in formulating andimplementing economic policies in their coun-tries. They also benefit from feedback fromFund economists, which helps improve thequality of their research and enlarges theaudience for their work.

The IMF Institute Contributes to theCaribbean Initiative

i

From left to right: Mercedes Da Costa (IMF Institute), Marion Williams, Governor of the Central Bank of Barba-dos, Edda Zoli (IMF Institute), and Paula De Masi (Western Hemisphere Department).

✒

Allan Brunner

articipants bring a unique set ofexperiences and knowledge to Insti-tute courses. They are often govern-ment officials with in-depthknowledge of their countries and

substantial hands-on experience in the for-mulation and implementation of economicpolicy. Moreover, many of them have expertisein specific areas—such as privatization ofstate-owned enterprises, bank regulation, orfinancial market development—which comple-ments that of Institute lecturers. The perspec-tives they provide on culture, institutions, andhistory allow greater insights into understand-ing the “intangibles” that must be consideredin the design and implementation of economicadjustment programs and structural reformsand the responses needed to deal with finan-cial crises and other policy issues.

Participants contribute to learning in anumber of ways: through informal interac-tions with fellow participants during class-room breaks and off hours, through

exchanges in workshops whose small settingsencourage the sharing of experiences, and inparticular, through their formal presentations.The latter, which typically focus on countryexperiences and area-specific knowledge, pro-vide a wealth of information, not only forother participants, but also for Institute lec-turers, who often incorporate the relevant seg-ments into their subsequent lectures.

The accompanying table contains a partiallist of presentations made by participants inselected courses at headquarters and overseasduring 2000. The list of topics is noteworthy intwo respects: first, the topics touch on themost important issues in today’s economicdebates, and second they provide a recountingof actual experiences of a wide range of coun-tries, from Asia and Latin America to Africaand transition economies. In her presentationon Malaysia’s adjustment experience duringthe Asian financial crisis, for example, Made-line Loh argued that by 1998, the effects of theAsian crisis were being fully felt and that thegovernment moved quickly to address the cri-sis. It adapted its approach to changing condi-

14

Participants Bring Experiences and Knowledgeto IMF Courses

ple, progress with fiscal reforms, trade liberal-ization, financial sector reform, exchange ratearrangements for island economies, and thepros and cons of dollarization in the region.Some of the special topics were covered byguest lecturers from the Central Bank of Bar-bados and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.Among the issues discussed were trade agree-ments in the region, particularly with theEuropean Union (EU), and the challengesahead in light of complaints before the WorldTrade Organization on preferential treatmentand the approaching expiration of the currentagreement with the EU. Lectures also focusedon bank supervision and regulation, includingthe benefits and risks of off-shore bankingand the international pressure to further reg-ulate those activities and to apply a uniformtax on them. Finally, the adviser to the Gover-nor of the Central Bank of Barbados dis-cussed the kind of economic problems thatsmall islands—particularly those with a nar-row economic base—are likely to face in aworld of increasing globalization and theimplications of these problems for economic

policymaking. As in all regional courses, dur-ing the final two days of the course partici-pants conducted a hands-on exercise toprepare a financial program.

The second distinctive feature of the coursewas the all-woman composition of the missionteam, whose members were Mercedes DaCosta (IMF Institute), head of the mission;Edda Zoli (IMF Institute); and Paula De Masi(Western Hemisphere Department). In addi-tion, the course was hosted by MarionWilliams, Governor of the Central Bank ofBarbados, who is one of the few women cen-tral bank governors in the world. Dr. Williamshas worked at the Central Bank of Barbadosfor over 20 years and has conducted studieson financial management, banking sectorreform, capital market developments, housingand mortgage market development, andemployment generation.

It is safe to say that although an all-womanmission hosted by a woman central bank gov-ernor is a rarity now, it will not be so in thenear future. ✒

p

tions, for example, by initially tightening mon-etary and fiscal policies, but when signs ofeconomic improvement in the region emerged,it eased those policies and initiated structuralreforms in the financial, corporate, and labormarkets. She concluded that although thesereforms have been successful so far, furtherreform in these markets is expected.

Oscar Sánchez, another participant,reviewed recent monetary policy experiencesin Mexico. According to his recounting, afterthe country abandoned its fixed exchange rateregime in 1995, it searched for a reliablenominal anchor. Experiments with various

forms of monetary base targeting were notsuccessful, prompting the central bank tomove toward inflation targeting. He concludedthat although the central bank has becomemore proactive toward inflation expectations—lowering inflation from 52 percent to under10 percent in about 5 years—hurdles remainbefore Mexico can implement a true inflation-targeting regime.

Indeed, these example highlight an impor-tant difference in the learning that occurs atan IMF Institute course and that whichoccurs in a university setting: contributionsby participants themselves.

Presentations by Participants in Selected Institute Courses at Headquarter and Overseas, 2000

Participant Country Topic

Zoltan Jakab Hungary Trade Integration in Hungary

Ajay Prakash India Financial Liberalization in India

Nurlan Nurseiit Aitkaliuly Kazakhstan Exchange Rate Policy in Kazakhstan

Hou Shaoze China Reform and Difficulties in Banking Sys-tems: General Introduction of China’sExperience

Charles P.R. Joseph Indonesia The Impact of Asian Crisis: How DidIndonesia Deal With It?

Yehiel Rehavi Israel Exchange Rate Policy in Israel

Fernando Vasquez Peru Business Cycles and Fiscal Policy Rules

Hastam Shah Pakistan The Public Debt Problem in Pakistan

Asha P. Kannan India Macroeconomic Adjustment Experiencesin India

Mohamed Ramzi Mohamed Sharif Malaysia Macroeconomic Adjustment Experiencesin Malaysia

Hazem Shunnar West Bank and Analysis of Palestinian Balance of Gaza Strip Payments

Kevin Charles Greenidge Barbados Adjustment Process in Barbados in1991–92

Hayden Manzano Trinidad and Tobago Recent Developments in the Energy Sectorin Trinidad and Tobago

Serign Cham The Gambia Structural Adjustment and Macroeco-nomic Policy Issues in The Gambia

Madeline Loh Malaysia Macroeconomic Adjustment Experiencesin Malaysia

Oscar Sánchez Mexico Macroeconomic Adjustment Experiencesin Mexico

15

✒

16

One highlight of the conference was theparticipation of the heads of three of the JVI’ssponsoring organizations. Michael Moore,President of the World Trade Organization,delivered the opening address; Horst Köhler,Managing Director of the IMF, gave thekeynote address at the gala dinner; and JeanLemierre, President of the European Bank forReconstruction and Development (EBRD),delivered the closing remarks. Another high-light was the participation of many high-levelofficials from the transition countries them-selves, including ministers of finance, gover-nors of central banks, and deputy ministersand governors.

Four common themes emerged from theconference.

First, a decade after the political transition,much has been achieved but, equally, muchremains to be done. While Central and EastEuropean countries, and to some extent theBaltic countries, have made the most progresstoward completing the transition process,huge challenges remain for Russia and therest of the Commonwealth of IndependentStates (CIS). Differences can be explainedpartly by favorable starting positions and

geography, but better economic policies alsoplayed an important part in the more success-ful cases.

John Odling-Smee, Director of the IMFEuropean II Department, focused in particularon one of the most important reasons for slowstructural reforms in the CIS countries—opposition to promarket reforms from power-ful vested interests. He noted that countriesthat pursued halting and relatively less ambi-tious reform agendas—perhaps believing thatin so doing they could protect their popula-tions from the worst consequences of thetransition to capitalism—also created myriadopportunities for rent-seeking and corruption.Once individuals and groups secured lucrativeincome streams, they were loathe to give themup. And because they have control over prof-itable sources of economic rent, they alsohave the means to influence public policy in away that preserves them. He noted thatalthough reducing the influence of vestedinterests over policymaking and implementa-tion was not easy, the experience of transitionprovides an important lesson: gradual andhalting structural reforms create a window forcorruption, whereas more rapid reforms makeit more difficult for vested interests to becomeentrenched.

Andras Inotai, Director General of the Insti-tute for the World Economy at the HungarianAcademy of Sciences, contended that the

Vienna Conference Focuses on Challenges to Completing TransitionFrom page 1

Joint Vienna Institute Welcomes Distinguished Visitors

On November 7, the JointVienna Institute (JVI) hosted threedistinguished visitors—Horst Köh-ler, Managing Director of the IMF,Klaus Liebscher, Governor of theÖsterreichische Nationalbank, andKarl-Heinz Grasser, Minister ofFinance for Austria. JVI DirectorLindsay Wolfe welcomed the visi-tors with a brief introduction to theJVI. He noted that since the JVIopened its doors in 1992, it hastrained 12,500 participants from33 transition countries. The groupwas given a tour of the facilities,including the student living quar-ters, the classrooms, and staffoffices. Mr. Köhler spoke briefly toparticipants of the Applied Eco-nomic Policy course, and followingthe tour, gave an informal pressbriefing for local journalists.

Klaus Liebscher, Governor of the Österreichische Nationalbank,Horst Köhler, Managing Director of the IMF, and Karl-HeinzGrasser, Austria’s Minister of Finance participate in a press briefingat the JVI.

17

growing differentiation in the transi-tion process is due to different levelsof socioeconomic development andmaturity prior to 1989, the year ofthe start of transformation; to differ-ent economic policies adopted after1989, particularly in structural trans-formation, privatization, and foreigndirect investment; and more impor-tant, to different spillover effects ofthe policies chosen in the first half ofthe 1990s.

Second, the prospect of accessionto the European Union (EU) is a pow-erful incentive for reform and can bea valuable anchor for economic poli-cies. Much as the Maastricht con-vergence criteria shaped theeconomic policies of current EUmembers for many years, the acces-sion process is spurring reform inthe 10 transition economies cur-rently negotiating with the EU. Incontrast, the CIS countries lack such anexternal political anchor.

Elena Kohútikóva, Vice-Governor of theNational Bank of Slovakia, noted that the EUhas become a natural benchmark for theeconomy and the socioeconomic system as awhole. She pointed out that among the candi-date countries for EU accession, Slovakia isranked fourth (after Slovenia, the CzechRepublic, and Hungary) and that its outputrepresents approximately 46 percent of EU’slevel and 67 percent of the weakest country ofthe EU (Greece). The big dilemma for Slo-vakia, she said, was the choice between con-cluding reforms called for under the NationalProgram for the Adoption of the Acquis (NPAA)and accelerating the process of catching upwith the EU in economic output by increasingthe pace of economic growth.

Third, structural and institutional reforms,including the establishment of effective socialsafety nets, are essential to the transition pro-cess. In the early stages of transition, theemphasis was on macroeconomic stabiliza-tion, and some speakers thought that struc-tural and institutional reforms had initiallybeen neglected. Among the structural reforms,financial sector reform plays a key part. Suc-cessful cases, such as Hungary, suggest thatthe role of foreign banks can be very impor-tant: in addition to much-needed capital, theybring technical expertise that has valuablespillover effects on the rest of the economy.And where economic restructuring has pro-

gressed more slowly, so too has traderestructuring.

Many speakers stressed the importance ofsocial safety nets; without such fall-backmechanisms, pursuing the necessary restruc-turing of the economy is more difficult andsometimes impossible. Several speakers,including EBRD President Jean Lemierre,noted that addressing poverty in transitioneconomies is the key challenge ahead.

Fourth, good governance is a necessary con-dition to encourage investment and economicgrowth. Although difficult to define, mostspeakers agreed that good governance is a keyingredient of successful transition. IMF Man-aging Director Horst Köhler emphasized thatat all stages of transition the highest attentionmust be paid to building sound institutionsand strong governance. He noted that poorgovernance and weak institutions create toomany opportunities for corruption, undermin-ing investor confidence and eroding publicsupport for reform. Fighting corruption, hesaid, requires transparent legal and regula-tory frameworks, strong law courts, trustwor-thy law enforcement agencies, and bettertrained, properly paid civil servants andjudges.

JVI Director Lindsay Wolfe confers with Gagik Arzumanyan,Deputy Minister of Finance and Economy of Armenia.

✒

Mohamed Khalfan Bin Khirbash, Minister ofState for Finance and Industry of the UnitedArab Emirates, opened the seminar. In hisopening remarks, he stressed that the issues ofglobalization and domestic economic manage-ment go hand in hand as countries try to fine-tune their integration into the world economy.

The presentations began with the globalperspective, then went on to regional andcountry-specific experiences. Michael Mussa,Economic Counselor and Director of theResearch Department of the IMF, spoke onthe world economy in the context of globaliza-tion. His presentation touched on such issuesas the role of international trade in increasingthe economic benefits of globalization, eco-nomic globalization through capital flows, anddealing with the instability of short-run capi-tal flows. His presentation was followed bythat of Shahid Yusuf, Research Manager,Development Economics Research Group ofthe World Bank. Yusuf focused on the chan-nels through which globalization affects eco-nomic development, such as trade, capitalflows and financial capability, migration, anddiffusion of technology.

Shang-Jin Wei of the Brookings Institution,speaking on the Asian experience with global-ization, demonstrated—using city data forChina—that openness through higher exportsand foreign direct investment encourages eco-nomic growth. He further noted that the qual-ity of public governance in a developingcountry plays an important role in a country’sability to absorb the beneficial aspects of glob-alization and that globalization itself canstrengthen the developing countries’ incen-tives to improve public governance.

Vittorio Corbo of the Pontificia UniversidadCatólica de Chile spoke on the Latin Americanperspective on globalization, using Chile as hismain example. He noted that the developmentmodel used by many Latin American countriesuntil the 1970s was based on a strategy thatstressed import substitution and a high degreeof intervention by the state. Starting in the1980s, however, many countries introducedreforms aimed at opening their economies toforeign trade and competition, eliminating dis-crimination against foreign direct investment,deregulating and privatizing public utilities,and reducing the role of the state in the econ-omy. These reforms prepared those countriesto live in a global environment and to with-stand the shocks emanating from the Asiancrisis in 1997–99.

The final two presentations focused on thespecific experiences of Egypt and Lebanon.Mahmoud Mohieldin of the Egyptian Ministryof Economy and Trade noted that Egyptopened its economy significantly in themid–1970s and implemented policies aimed atachieving macroeconomic stability. AlthoughEgypt’s economic performance has beenuneven during the past 25 years, there is nodoubt that the economy has achieved highrates of growth and that people’s living stan-dards have improved significantly. The chal-lenge ahead is to maintain macroeconomicstability while accelerating deregulation andprivatization.

Atif Kubursi of McMaster University dis-cussed how a post-conflict country such asLebanon could regain its prosperity in a glob-alized environment. He advocated thatLebanon should reshape its economy alongthe lines of the “new economy” that hasemerged as a result of the revolution takingplace in the information computer technology.In such an economy, growth emanates fromtechnology-driven sectors. The success of this

18

Managing National Economies inTime of GlobalizationFrom page 1

From left to right: Mohsin S. Khan, Director of the IMF Institute, Jassim Al-Mannai, Director General of the AMF,and Mohamed Khalfan Bin Khirbash, Minister of State for Finance and Industry of the United Arab Emirates,and Ali Sadik, Director of EPI, at the high-level seminar in Abu Dhabi.

19

strategy, however, rests on Lebanon’s abilityto retrain its educated labor force and attractLebanese talent currently residing outside thecountry.

Some officials, especially from countriesthat remain relatively heavily regulated andclosed, expressed serious misgivings aboutglobalization, noting that domestic industrieswould not be able to withstand the pressureof competition and that the inherent volatility

of capital flows is economically damaging.Others pointed to the overwhelming evidencethat open and liberalized economies lead toeconomic growth and higher living standards.Overall, participants agreed that the seminarprovided a balanced view of globalization,emphasizing that domestic policies play animportant role in helping to maximize the ben-efits of globalization while minimizing itscosts. ✒

IMF Institute: Overseas Training Courses and Seminars, July–December 2000

Activity Date Location

Regional Course on Financial August 18–September 1 BarbadosProgramming and Policies

CEMLA September 4–5 Mexico

Regional Workshop on Banking September 11–15 SenegalSoundness

Regional Course on Financial September 25–October 6 CameroonProgramming and Policies

Regional Course on Financial October 9–20 PortugalProgramming and Policies

Regional Workshop on Banking October 30–November 3 CameroonSoundness

Regional Course on Macroeconomic October 30–November 10 MalaysiaManagement and Financial SectorIssues

Seminar on Financial Analysis November 4–8 Saudi Arabiaand Programming

Regional Course on Financial November 27–December 8 SenegalProgramming and Policies

Regional Course on Advanced December 4–15 EstoniaMacroeconomic and FinancialManagement

Lacea Seminar December 12–14 Brazil

1List does not include courses/seminars taught at overseas regional centers.

20

Appointments and transfersMr. Norbert Funke joined the African Divisionas Economist in July.

Mr. Woon Gyu Choi joined the Asian Divisionas Economist in July.

Mr. Dhanusha Ponnamperuma joined theAdministrative Division in July.

Ms. Anne Epaulard joined the African Divisionas Economist in August.

Mr. Danyang Xie joined the Asian Division asEconomist in August.

Mr. Stanley Black joined the Immediate Officeas Senior Policy Advisor in August.

Mr. Juan Carlos Flores joined the ImmediateOffice as Research Assistant in August.

Ms. Caryl McNeilly returned to the EuropeanDivision as Senior Economist in Septemberfrom her leave of absence.

Mrs. Gulrukh Gamwalla joined the EuropeanDivision as Staff Assistant in September.

Mr. Paul Wade joined the European Divisionas Senior Economist in September.

Ms. Jean Laidlaw joined the Immediate Officeon a one-year TAP as Senior AdministrativeAssistant in October.

Ms. Myrna Bas joined the Administrative Divi-sion on a six-month TAP as Staff Assistant inOctober.

Ms. Irina Dolinskaya joined the EuropeanDivision as Economist (EP) in October.

Mr. Dmitriy Gershenson joined the AsianDivision as Economist (EP) in October.

Mr. Serge Ghanem joined the African Divisionas Economist (EP) in October.

Departures and transfersMr. Peter Montiel, Senior Policy Advisor in theImmediate Office, resigned from the Fund inJuly.

Ms. Saadia Refaqat, Research Assistant, inthe Immediate Office, resigned from the Fundin July.

Ms. Susan George, Economist, in the Euro-pean Division, transferred to EU2 in July.

Ms. Maryse Dube, Staff Assistant, in theEuropean Division, transferred to APD inJuly.

Mr. Arturo Rios, Research Assistant, in theImmediate Office, resigned from the Fund inAugust.

Mr. Andrew Feltenstein, Visiting Scholar, inthe Immediate Office, resigned from the Fundin August.

Mr. Greg Dahl, Advisor, in the ImmediateOffice, transferred to Madagascar as SeniorResident Representative in August.

Mrs. Jeanine Moeis, Senior AdministrativeAssistant, in the Asian Division, transferred toSTA on a one-year TAP in August.

Mrs. Margaret Boesch, Senior AdministrativeAssistant, in the Immediate Office, transferredto the Asian Division in August.

Mr. Qaizar Hussain, Economist, in the AsianDivision, transferred to APD in August.

Mr. Richard Mangus, Staff Assistant, in theInternal Training Section, resigned from theFund in September.

Ms. Jodi Scarlatta, Senior Economist, in theEuropean Division, transferred to MAE inSeptember.

changes

Applicants for IMF Institute courses held in English at headquarters are expected to show proof ofEnglish language proficiency. We are, therefore, requesting proof of such proficiency before admissiondecisions can be made.

For the benefit of participants and their sponsors, the following information may be helpful: Interna-tional tests, such as the TOEFL and the IELTS, are now available worldwide, and applicants who needto take such tests are advised to visit their web sites for additional information:http://www.toefl.org/comptest.html or http://www.edunet.com/ielts/. If you take the TOEFL, pleaseenter the IMF code 5456 to expedite receipt of the score.

Such tests may not be easily available at short notice. If you find it impossible to take either of thesetests in your country in time for your course in Washington, please contact the IMF Resident Represen-tative or other IMF staff who can attest to your language skills and request them to send us a noteabout your language proficiency. This is an interim measure. In the future, we urge all applicants andsponsors to ensure that a test score is included in the application form and encourage applicants totake a test before applying, or produce other proof of proficiency at the time of application.

SPECIAL NOTICE for Applicants and Sponsors of English Language Courses in Washington

imf headquarters participants June–December 2000

2000. 12Public Finance—English

2000. 11Macroeconomic

Management andPolicies—Arabic

2000. 9Monetary and Exchange

Operations—Spanish

2000. 10MacroeconomicAdjustment and FinancialSector Issues—English

21

22

2000.13MacroeconomicManagement andPolicies—English

2000.15Financial Programming andPolicies—English

2000.16Macroeconomic

Adjustment and FinancialSector Issues—French

2000.14Advanced Financial -

Programming—Spanish

23

imf headquarters participants

2000.17Money and BankingStatistics—English

2000.19MacroeconomicAdjustment and FinancialSector Issues—Spanish

2000.18Advanced Financial

Programming—French

24

Second Distance Learning FPP course

takes offOn January 15, 2001 the IMF Institutebegan the second delivery of its distancelearning FPP course. The first one wasdelivered in spring 2000. From the morethan 120 applicants, 50 participants wereselected. They work and live in fivedifferent continents and in many differenttime zones. The first part of the course(80 hours) is being conducted from adistance by four Institute economists: CarylMcNeilly, Paul Wade, Dalia Hakura, andJohn Matovu. The course coordinators areWillem Bier and Caryl McNeilly. Thoseparticipants who complete the distanceportion of their work are invited to a two-week seminar in Washington in April.

The material the participants will be using has been mailed to them.It is also available through the Institute's Distance Learning website:https://www-dln.imf.org, now up and operational. The site includes abulletin board, where participants can conduct small group discussions,very similar to the counseling groups that take place in face-to-faceInstitute courses. Former participants can also access the site (though theycannot participate in the discussions). To sign up, just go to the address andsign up. It is fast and easy.

Introducing the IMF Institute's new DistanceLearning website:

https://www-dln.imf.org