Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Governments raise funds to meet their financing needs using a range of fixed income securities and loans with different maturities, interest rates, and exchange rate structures. Public debt managers need to consider various policy objectives when deciding on the structure of the public liability portfolio. This paper describes a simulation model developed at the Turkish Treasury to assist the decision-making process in debt strategy formulation. The model is used to analyze the medium and long-term consequences of alternative debt management strategies in terms of cost and risk characteristics, and provides key inputs to decision making.

Banks & Banking Reform --- Debt Markets --- Economic Theory & Research --- Emerging Markets --- External Debt --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial markets --- Public debt management --- Risk management --- Simulation models

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Sovereign credit guarantees and government on-lending can catalyze private sector investment and fulfill specific policy objectives. However, contingent liabilities stemming from guarantees and contingent assets stemming from on-lending expose governments to risk. Prudent risk management, including risk analysis and measurement, can help identify and mitigate these risks. This paper proposes a four-step structure for analyzing and measuring credit risk: (i) defining key characteristics to determine the choice of a risk analysis approach; (ii) analyzing risk drivers; (iii) quantifying risks; and (iv) applying risk analyses and quantification to the design of risk management tools. This structure is based on an assessment of approaches discussed in academia and applied in practice. The paper demonstrates how the four steps of credit risk management are applied in Colombia, Sweden, and Turkey. It also discusses how the proposed framework is applied in Indonesia as it develops a credit risk management framework for sovereign guarantees. Country experiences show that although sovereign risk managers can draw on insights from credit risk management in the private sector, academic literature, and practices in other countries, approaches to risk management need to be highly context-specific. Key differentiating factors include characteristics of the guarantee and on-lending portfolio, the sovereign's specific risk exposure, the availability of market information and data, and resources and capacity in the public sector. Developing a sound risk analysis and measurement framework requires significant investments in resources, capacity building, and time. Governments should view this process as iterative and long-term.

Access to Finance --- Bankruptcy and Resolution of Financial Distress --- Banks and Banking Reform --- Contingent Liabilities --- Credit Risk --- Debt Markets --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Fiscal Risks --- Guarantees --- Insurance & Risk Mitigation --- Onlending --- Public Debt Management --- Risk Management

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The magnitude of the public liabilities incurred as a result of the unprecedented government action in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008-2009, and the consequences of exiting from the projected high debt scenario, have become a major source of concern about a future sovereign debt crisis. As Low-Income Countries (LICs) face unique challenges in debt management (DeM) due to their more limited financing sources and higher capacity constraints, their ability to successfully manage their public debt burdens effectively through a crisis of this magnitude is far from assured. Therefore, the challenges of the last two years will require a re-evaluation of existing DeM strategies in LICs, focusing on the identification of institutional weaknesses and the assessment and mitigation of potential risk. It is in this context that this paper examines the application of two global public goods in LICs: the Debt Management Performance Assessment (DeMPA) and the Medium-Term Debt Management Strategy (MTDS) tools. The results of the application of these tools from 2007-2009 provide valuable information to policymakers and other stakeholders on the development of sound public DeM practices and analytical capacity, with the goal of strengthening the public balance sheet and reducing vulnerability to financial crises.

Access to Finance --- Balance sheet --- Banks & Banking Reform --- Capacity constraints --- Captive investor --- Creditor --- Debt --- Debt burdens --- Debt crisis --- Debt management --- Debt Markets --- Developing countries --- Developing country --- Emerging Markets --- External Debt --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial crises --- Financial crisis --- Government debt --- International bank --- International Economics and Trade --- Monetary fund --- Portfolios --- Private Sector Development --- Public borrowing --- Public debt --- Public debt management --- Sovereign debt

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This paper analyzes results of a survey on debt management strategies conducted by the Banking and Debt Management Department of the World Bank. The analysis focuses on (1) whether a public debt management strategy exists in a given country, (2) whether it is made public, and (3) in which form it is imparted. The paper analyzes the distribution of the latter characteristics over different regions, income groups, and levels of indebtedness using graphical analysis. Using regression analysis, it investigates the extent to which basic economic factors can explain the characteristics of public debt management strategies across countries.

Debt Management Department --- Debt Management Strategies --- Debt management strategy --- Debt managers --- Debt Markets --- Debt obligations --- Debt portfolio --- Debt servicing --- Economic Theory and Research --- External Debt --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Government debt --- International Economics & Trade --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Public Debt --- Public Debt Management --- Public Sector Economics and Finance --- Strategic Debt Management

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Given that public spending will have a positive impact on GDP if the benefits exceed the marginal cost of public funds, the present paper deals with measuring costs and benefits of public spending. The paper discusses one cost seldom considered in the literature and in policy debates, namely, the volatility derived from additional public spending. The paper identifies a relationship between public spending volatility and consumption volatility, which implies a direct welfare loss to society. This loss is substantial in developing countries, estimated at 8 percent of consumption. If welfare losses due to volatility are this sizeable, then measuring the benefits of public spending is critical. Gauging benefits based on macro aggregate data requires three caveats: a) considering of the impact of the funding (taxation) required for the additional public spending; b) differentiating between investment and capital formation; c) allowing for heterogeneous response of output to different types of capital and differences in network development. It is essential to go beyond country-specificity to project-level evaluation of the benefits and costs of public projects. From the micro viewpoint, the rate of return of a project must exceed the marginal cost of public funds, determined by tax levels and structure. Credible evaluations require microeconomic evidence and careful specification of counterfactuals. On this, the impact evaluation literature and methods play a critical role. From individual project evaluation, the analyst must contemplate the general equilibrium impacts. In general, the paper advocates for project evaluation as a central piece of any development platform. By increasing the efficiency of public spending, the government can permanently increase the rate of productivity growth and, hence, affect the growth rate of GDP.

Access to Finance --- Debt Markets --- Economic efficiency --- Economic Theory and Research --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Public --- Public debt --- Public debt management --- Public Expenditure --- Public expenditure management --- Public funds --- Public Sector Economics and Finance --- Public Sector Expenditure Analysis and Management --- Public spending --- Tax --- Taxation