This review assesses the experience gained to date in carrying out the longer-term program engagement (LTPE) policy and preparing the ex post assessments (EPAs). It discusses the main characteristics of LTPE members and the findings of the EPAs, analyzes the role of the EPAs in the Fund’s due diligence, and provides recommendations for improving their effectiveness.

Longer-term program engagement (LTPE) occurs when a member has spent at least seven of the past 10 years under Fund-supported financial arrangements. In response to the Executive Board’s request for periodic updates on the incidence of LTPEs, this is the fifteenth such report and provides information through September 1, 2014

Longer-term program engagement (LTPE) occurs when a member has spent at least seven of the past 10 years under Fund-supported financial arrangements. In response to the Executive Board’s request for periodic updates on the incidence of LTPEs, this is the twelfth such report and provides information through June 22, 2011.

Financial sector issues and policies are central to the Fund’s surveillance mission, as the recent crisis has amply demonstrated, and the institution has placed a high priority on enhancing the coverage and depth of analysis of financial sector issues in surveillance. Achieving this goal requires far-reaching operational and resource adjustments, which are already underway. However, these alone may not be enough. Changes in the Fund’s mandate and modalities of surveillance may also be needed. A key goal of these changes should be to strengthen multilateral surveillance. New analytical tools and effective forms of engagement at the global level are crucial for financial surveillance, given an increasingly interconnected and globalized international financial system. At the same time, financial surveillance at the country level should also be strengthened and become a central part of the Article IV consultation process.

This note updates guidance on key operational aspects of the policy on Longer-Term Program Engagement (LTPE). The updated guidance reflects operational changes following the Board’s decision on April 30, 2015 to replace Ex Post Assessments (EPAs) for members with LTPEs with succinct ex post peer reviewed assessments (PRAs)1 to reflect on the lessons from the past for the design of successor arrangements or usage of the Policy Support Instrument (PSI).

Following the request of the IMFC, this paper represents a first step in reassessing the Fund’s approach to tackling governance issues, the guidelines for which are contained in a 1997 Guidance Note. The paper examines the record of implementation of these guidelines in the period since the last such review was conducted in 2004, focusing on the handling of issues relating to corruption.

This report seeks to help the IMF enhance its effectiveness by identifying major recurring issues from the IEO’s first 20 evaluations and assessing where they stand. The IMF’s core areas of responsibility are surveillance, lending, and capacity development. The aim of this report is to strengthen the follow-up process by focusing on key issues that recurred in IEO evaluations, rather than on specific recommendations on their implementation. The IEO believes that a framework of reviewing and monitoring recurring issues would be useful in establishing incentives for progress, strengthening the Board’s oversight, and providing learning opportunities for the IMF.

The Thirty-Sixth Issue of Selected Decisions and Selected Documents of the International Monetary Fund includes decisions, interpretations, and resolutions of the Executive Board and the Board of Governors of the IMF, as well as selected documents relevant to the current activities of the Fund.

The trend for international engagement in post-conflict reconstruction has produced a host of best-practice postulates on topics such as local involvement in decision-making, accountability for past atrocities, sensitivity to context, and the construction of democratic institutions of governance. International law has potential relevance for many of these themes, yet the question of how the implementation of best-practice policy recommendations might be affected by international law remains under-examined. This book offers a fuller understanding of the role of international law in the practice of post-conflict reconstruction. It explores how international legal issues that arise in the post-conflict period relate to a number of strands of the policy debate, including government creation, constitution-making, gender policy, provision of security, justice for past atrocities, rule of law development, economic recovery, returning displaced persons, and responsibilities of international actors. The chapters of the book work to reveal the extent to which international law figures in the policy of internationally enabled post-conflict reconstruction across a range of sectors. They also highlight the scope for international law to be harnessed in a more effective manner from the perspective of the transition to peace and stability. The book lays out a basis for future policy making on post-conflict reconstruction; one that is informed about the international legal parameters, and more aware of how international law can be utilized to promote key objectives.

The papers in this volume draw on background work done in preparation for the study Governance of the IMF: An Evaluation, Independent Evaluation Office, International Monetary Fund, May 28, 2008 (available at http://www.ieo-imf.org). This compilation presents in one collection the most recent work to date on the subject of governance of the IMF and contributes to the ongoing dialogue on how best to strengthen the governance of this important global institution. Good governance can contribute to the IMF’s legitimacy by ensuring appropriate voice and representation for the membership, by allowing the Fund to fulfill its mandates effectively and efficiently, and by facilitating accountability for relevant stakeholders. Three main conclusions follow from the studies in this volume. First, to strengthen its legitimacy and effectiveness, the Fund needs greater, higher level and more transparent involvement of member country authorities in its governance. Second, the Board needs to play a stronger role in strategy development and oversight, which requires a shift away from the day-to-day business of the organization. Finally, there are significant accountability gaps that need to be addressed if the IMF is to remain effective and regain legitimacy.