This third edition of the Coordinated Portfolio Investment Survey Guide has been prepared to assist economies that participate or are preparing to participate in the Coordinated Portfolio Investment Survey (CPIS). It builds on and updates the second edition of the CPIS Guide (2002) to reflect the adoption of the Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual, sixth edition (BPM6) as the standard framework for compiling cross-border position statistics.
The production of the Handbook on Securities Statistics (the Handbook) is a joint undertaking by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the European Central Bank (ECB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). They have specific interests and expertise in the area of securities statistics and are the core members of the Working Group on Securities Databases (WGSD). In 2007, the WGSD—originally established by the IMF in 1999—was reconvened in response to various international initiatives and recommendations to improve information on securities markets. The WGSD is chaired by the ECB and includes the BIS, the IMF and the World Bank. Selected experts from national central banks, who participated actively in the various international groups that identified the need to improve data on securities markets, were also invited to contribute to some of the WGSD’s deliberations. In mid-2008, the WGSD agreed to sponsor the development of a handbook on securities statistics. In November 2009, the report entitled “The Financial Crisis and Information Gaps”, which was prepared by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Secretariat and IMF staff at the request of the Group of Twenty (G-20) finance ministers and central bank governors, endorsed the development of the Handbook, as well as the gradual implementation of improved statistics on issuance and holdings of securities at the national and international level. The BIS’s compilation of data on debt securities plays an important role in this respect. The Handbook sponsors responded to the demand from various international groups for the development of methodological standards for securities statistics and released the Handbook in three parts. Part 1 on debt securities issues was published in May 2009, and Part 2 on debt securities holdings in September 2010. Part 3 of the Handbook on equity securities statistics was published in November 2012. The methodology described in all three parts was based on the System of National Accounts 2008 (2008 SNA) and the sixth edition of the Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual (BPM6). The three parts also went slightly beyond the confines of these standards by providing guidance and additional information on, for example, the main features of securities, special and borderline cases, and breakdowns of issues and holdings of securities by counterparty. Special attention was also paid to specific operations such as mergers and acquisitions, restructuring, privatization and nationalization, and transactions between general government and public corporations. From the beginning, the intention was to combine the three parts into one volume, thereby eliminating any overlap and repetitions between the parts. The Handbook’s conceptual framework is complemented by a set of tables for presenting securities data both at an aggregated level and broken down by various features. This should allow sufficient flexibility in the presentation of data on issuance and holdings of securities, in line with developments in securities markets and financing. The Handbook is the first publication of its kind to focus exclusively on securities statistics. Recent turmoil in global financial markets has confirmed the importance of timely, relevant, coherent, and internationally comparable data on securities, from the perspective of monetary policy, fiscal policy, and financial stability analysis. This Handbook provides a conceptual framework for the compilation and presentation of statistics on different types.
This paper examines the determinants of sub-national governments risk premia using secondary market data for U.S., Canada, Australia and Germany. It finds that, as for central governments, fiscal fundamentals matter in the pricing of risk premia, and sub-national governments with higher public debt and larger deficits pay higher premia. However, this relationship is not uniform across countries. Market pricing mechanisms are less effective in presence of explicit or implicit guarantees from the central government. Specifically, we show that in pricing risk premia of sub-national governments, markets are less responsive to fiscal fundamental when sub-national governments depend on high transfers from the central government, i.e., when there is some form of implicit guarantee from the center. Using primary market data, the paper also looks at whether transfer dependency from the central government influences sub-national governments’ incentive to access markets. We show that high transfer dependency lowers the probability of sub-national governments to borrow on capital markets.
Through the provision of both social and economic infrastructure, public investment can serve as an important catalyst for economic growth. A significant body of theoretical and empirical research underscores the positive relationship between investment in high-quality public infrastructure and economy-wide productivity.1 Against the background of a steady decline in public investment as a share of GDP in advanced economies, evidence of infrastructure bottlenecks in emerging economies, and the sluggish global economic recovery, the G-20 has called for ramping up public investment to raise long-run economic growth (G-20, 2014).2 However, the economic and social impact of public investment crucially depends on its efficiency. Despite anecdotal evidence of projects plagued by time delays, cost overruns, and inadequate maintenance, there are few robust empirical studies of the determinants of public investment efficiency. This paper explores the link between public investment management (PIM) institutions and the efficiency of public investment for the G-20 countries. Based on the analysis from a recent IMF study, the paper finds that better PIM enhances public infrastructure quality, and pinpoints key institutional reforms needs to boost public investment efficiency (IMF 2015). These findings and recommendations are based on a comprehensive data set on investment, infrastructure and capital stocks, and two analytical innovations: (i) a new cross-country Public Investment Efficiency Index (PIE-X); and (ii) a new Public Investment Management Assessment (PIMA) which is applied to G-20 countries.
Event studies are used to analyze the impact of U.S. financial, fiscal, and monetary policies from US to foreign asset prices across a range of G20 countries and Switzerland. The initial announcement that the Administration supported tighter regulation of banks led to a generalized fall in advanced economy bank shares compared to local equity markets. For later Dodd-Frank announcements, however, falls in U.S. bank equity prices were accompanied by increases in U.K. and Swiss valuations, implying a potential for regulatory arbitrage. Turning to macro policies, the 2008/9 fiscal and monetary stimulus packages generally supported foreign activity, while the impact of similar stimulus in 2010 is less clear.
Using newly-constructed data covering the last decade, we document that, in most of forty markets, when added to the main index, firms’ returns experience an increase in comovement with the rest of the index, reflected in higher beta and greater explanatory power of the market return. Stock turnover and analyst coverage also typically increase upon inclusion. Using various tests, we find the demand-based view of comovement (the category/habitat theories of Barberis, Shleifer and Wurgler, 2005) to provide a good explanation for many of our findings. Some results, though, suggest that information-related factors are also important in explaining the increased comovement.
This paper explores factors behind Canadian banks' relative resilience in the ongoing credit turmoil. We identify two main causes: a higher share of depository funding (vs. wholesale funding) in liabilities, and a number of regulatory and structural factors in the Canadian market that reduced banks' incentives to take excessive risks. The robust predictive power of the depository funding ratio is confirmed in a multivariate analysis of the performance of 72 largest commercial banks in OECD countries during the turmoil.
Holding foreign assets reduces the volatility of a country's income by allowing countries to share risk. Yet, financial integration is limited in Asia. This paper estimates how much Australia and other countries in the Asia-Pacific region would gain from greater financial integration. The results suggest that these welfare gains are large, which argues in favor of a progressive capital account liberalization across the region.
The Australian government registered strong financial performance during the period under review. There was an increase in net worth owing to transactions, as measured by the net operating balance (NOB). These resources enabled the government to reduce its net liabilities and, to a lesser extent, acquire financial assets on a net basis. The Australia pilot study is considered a point of reference for other pilot studies implementing the Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001 framework, as a means of strengthening fiscal analysis.
Mr. Aleksandar Zaklan, Mr. Paolo Mauro, Martín Minnoni, and Mr. Andre Faria
We trace the history of where and why investors from the most advanced countries directed funds, ultimately helping finance economic development in emerging market countries. To do this, we analyze the determinants of international investors' willingness to hold the external liabilities issued by emerging market countries, through cross-country regressions for both prices (bond spreads) and quantities (bond market capitalization or stocks of external liabilities) estimated at various points during two waves of financial globalization (1870-1913 and the present time). The data are drawn from primary sources for the historical period, and the much-expanded, new vintage of the Lane and Milesi-Ferretti (2006) data set for the modern period. The results suggest that, throughout the past one and a half centuries, a combination of human capital (including informal human capital) and institutional quality has been a key determinant of emerging market countries' ability to attract international investors.