Assessing Bias and Accuracy in the World Bank-IMF's Debt Sustainability Framework for Low-Income Countries
Author/Editor: Andrew Berg, Enrico Berkes, Catherine A. Pattillo, Andrea Presbitero, Yorbol Yakhshilikov
Release Date: © March, 2014
ISBN
: 978-1-47557-977-2
Stock #: WPIEA2014048
English
Stock Status: On back-order
Languages and formats available
| English | French | Spanish | Arabic | Russian | Chinese | Portuguese | |
| Paperback | Yes | ||||||
| Yes | |||||||
| ePub | Yes | ||||||
| Mobipocket | Yes |
Description
The World Bank and the IMF have adopted a debt sustainability framework (DSF) to evaluate the risk of debt distress in Low Income Countries (LICs). At the core of the DSF are empirically-based thresholds for each of five different measures of the debt burden (the “debt threshold approach” DTA). The DSF contains a rule for aggregating the information contained in these five different variables which we label the “worst-case aggregator” (WCA) in view of the fact that the DSF considers a breach of any one of the thresholds sufficient to indicate a high risk of debt distress. However, neither the DTA nor the WCA has heretofore been subject to empirical testing. We find that: (1) the DTA loses information relative to a simple proposed alternative; (2) the WCA is too conservative (predicting crises too often) in terms of the loss function used in the DSF; and (3) the WCA is less accurate than some simple proposed alternative aggregators as a predictor ofdebt distress.
More publications in this series: Working Papers
More publications by: Andrew Berg ; Enrico Berkes ; Catherine A. Pattillo ; Andrea Presbitero ; Yorbol Yakhshilikov
