Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 72 items for :

  • "OECD secretariat" x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund

methodological questions, to identify difficulties for the implementation of some of the international standards, and to review the consistency of certain recommendations in efforts toward harmonization of the FDI statistics. The 2001 SIMSDI Update 1.5 In October 2000, the IMF’s BOP Committee agreed that the information obtained from the 1997 SIMSDI should be updated. Similarly, in November 2000, the OECD Secretariat was asked to take the necessary steps to update the information for its member countries. The relevant committees of both organizations agreed that a new

Joseph C. Wheeler

, reaching a level of about $5 billion in 1987. Unfortunately, during this same decade Arab-OPEC aid, which reached the extraordinary level of nearly $14 billion (at 1987 prices and exchange rates) in 1975 and which ran over $10 billion until 1981, has since come down to slightly above $2 billion in 1988 (though still at a high ratio of ODA to GNP). The net result of these opposing trends has been that world aid during the 1980s remained about the same in real terms. For the future, the OECD Secretariat sees continued modest increases in ODA from DAC members in real

International Monetary Fund

with a great many reservations on certain codes, but also with the expectation that over time these reservations will be removed. The question really is how high the barrier to membership should be set. This question is an interesting intellectual issue that will be answered not by the OECD Secretariat but through negotiations between the PIT countries and the OECD member countries. How rapidly and to what degree should these countries be asked to liberalize their capital accounts and various areas of invisible transactions, such as insurance and banking? I think

International Monetary Fund
The global financial crisis underscored the costs of systemic instability at both the national and global levels and highlighted the importance of dedicated macroprudential and capital flow management policies. The IMF has been assisting its members with policy advice as well as developing and making operational their policy frameworks. Multilateral aspects of both policies need to be fully considered, including the interaction with other domestic and international legal frameworks. To the extent that capital flows are the source of systemic financial sector risks, the tools used to address those risks can be seen as both capital flow management measures (CFMs) and macroprudential measures (MPMs).