Effective risk management at central banks is best enabled by a sound framework embedded throughout the organization that supports the design and execution of risk management activities. To evaluate the risk management practices at a central bank, the Safeguards Assessments Division of the IMF’s Finance Department developed a tool that facilitates stocktaking of elements that are present and categorizes the function based on its maturity. Tailored recommendations are then provided to the central bank which provide a roadmap to advance the risk management function.

Effective risk management at central banks is best enabled by a sound framework embedded throughout the organization that supports the design and execution of risk management activities. To evaluate the risk management practices at a central bank, the Safeguards Assessments Division of the IMF’s Finance Department developed a tool that facilitates stocktaking of elements that are present and categorizes the function based on its maturity. Tailored recommendations are then provided to the central bank which provide a roadmap to advance the risk management function.

A survey of the fundamental issues and techniques surrounding risk management.

This report by the external expert panel (“the panel”) examines the effectiveness and appropriateness of the safeguards assessments policy in the five years since its last review in 2010. In addition to expressing an opinion on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the safeguards assessment policy, the panel also makes recommendations to the Executive Board for its consideration to improve and optimize the benefits to be garnered from the safeguards assessment policy. The panel’s opinion is based on (i) consultations with key stakeholders, including central bank authorities, IMF Executive Directors’ offices, Fund and World Bank staff; (ii) examination of safeguards assessment and other Fund-specific documents; and (iii) study of international reference materials.

This report by the external expert panel (“the panel”) examines the effectiveness and appropriateness of the safeguards assessments policy in the five years since its last review in 2015. In addition to expressing an opinion on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the safeguards assessment policy, the panel also makes recommendations to the Executive Board for its consideration to improve and optimize the benefits to be garnered from the safeguards assessment policy. The panel’s opinion is based on (i) consultations with key stakeholders, including central bank authorities, IMF Executive Directors’ offices, and Fund staff; (ii) examination of safeguards assessment and other Fund-specific documents; and (iii) study of international reference materials.

This paper reviews experience with the safeguards assessment policy since the last review in 2015. The policy is subject to periodic reviews by the Executive Board. The policy’s main objective is to mitigate risks of misuse of Fund resources and misreporting of monetary data under Fund arrangements. Consistent with past reviews, an external panel of experts provided an independent perspective on the implementation of the policy.

This paper argues that nonfinancial risk management is an essential element of good governance of central banks. It provides a funnelled analysis, on the basis of selected literature, by (i) presenting an outline of central bank governance in general; (ii) zooming in on internal governance and organization issues of central banks; (iii) highlighting the main issues with nonfinancial risk management; and (iv) ending with recommendations for future work. It shows how attention for nonfinancial risk management has been growing, and how this has amplified the call for better governance of central banks. It stresses that in the area of nonfinancial risk management there are no crucial differences between commercial and central banks: both have people, processes, procedures, and structures. It highlights policy areas to be explored.

activity remained consistent with recent years. 21 assessments were completed during the update period (September 2015-April 2017) and five were in progress at the end of the period. Activity continues to average around 13 assessments per year. While the number of central banks under monitoring decreased slightly from 67 to 63, some monitoring cases required intense engagement due to safeguards challenges that emerged. These related to forensic investigations, governance reforms, and a deterioration in safeguards frameworks of central banks facing difficult external conditions.