Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

The International Monetary Fund and capital flows

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Grenville, Stephen

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University

Access Statement

Open Access

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Abstract

Controls on international capital flows were a central issue for the International Monetary Fund at Bretton Woods in 1944. But by the 1970s, mainstream thinking was encouraging open capital flows. A succession of damaging crises followed: Latin America in the 1980s, Mexico again in 1994 and Asia in 1997. Fund policies were tweaked, but the causes were seen as being largely in the recipient countries. Capital controls were specifically rejected. Nevertheless, the Fund's view began to shift, probably encouraged by the 2008 global financial crisis. There was a growing recognition that the capital-flow surges at the heart of these crises were often externally driven, reflecting global factors. The appropriate response would include capital flow management (CFM). The Fund recognized this in its 2012 Institutional View, but CFM was at the bottom of the policy toolbox, surrounded by conditions and constraints, maintaining the stigma on CFM. Meanwhile many emerging economies were enhancing their ability to cope with excessive capital flows, although at some cost (slower growth, tighter fiscal policy, large foreign-exchange reserves). At the same time the flows were increasing, with a bigger component of flighty portfolio flows. CFM measures still have an important place in this new environment, but the Fund's reluctance to embrace them means that a deep discussion on operationalizing effective CFMs is still lacking. JEL Codes: F32, F33, F34, F42, F65 Key words: International Monetary Fund||capital flow management||economic crises

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Working papers in trade and development

Book Title

Entity type

Publication

Access Statement

Open Access

License Rights

DOI

Restricted until