06431oam 22008774 450 991082053370332120240402045327.01-4755-9171-31-4755-0774-7(CKB)2670000000278807(EBL)1606820(SSID)ssj0000952569(PQKBManifestationID)11522105(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000952569(PQKBWorkID)10907020(PQKB)11503972(MiAaPQ)EBC1606820(Au-PeEL)EBL1606820(CaPaEBR)ebr10627028(OCoLC)870245023(IMF)WPIEE2012167(IMF)WPIEA2012167(EXLCZ)99267000000027880720020129d2012 uf 0engur|n|---|||||txtccrEvolution of Debt Sustainability Analysis in Low-Income Countries : Some Aggregate Evidence /Benedicte Baduel, Robert Price1st ed.Washington, D.C. :International Monetary Fund,2012.1 online resource (57 p.)IMF Working PapersDescription based upon print version of record.1-4755-4907-5 1-4755-0515-9 Includes bibliographical references.Cover; Abstract; Contents; I. Introduction; II. Motivation and Sample; Boxes; 1. The External Debt Sustainability Analysis (DSA); Tables; 1. Sample Countries; III. Results; A. Baseline ratios; Figures; 1. Evolution of Baseline Debt Ratios (PV of PPG External Debt), 2006-29; 2. Baseline Peak Average Values by DSA Vintage; 2. Debt-to-GDP: 2010 Baseline Scenario vs. 2006 and 2010 Historical Scenarios, 2006-29; B. Numerators: Trajectories of debt, debt service and financing needs; 3. Debt and Macroeconomic Projections, 2006-29; 4. Financing Needs, 2006-29; C. Changing structures of indebtedness5. Debt Accumulation Dynamics, 2006-296. Aid Flows, 2006-29; 7. Average Grant Element in New Disbursements, 2006-29; 8. Aid Flows and Average Grant Element, 2006-29; 9. Average Interest Rate, 2006-29; 10. Nominal GDP Growth-Interest Rate Differentials, 2010-29; 11. Endogenous Debt Dynamics, 2006-29; D. Denominators: adjustments in macroeconomic projections; 12. PV of Debt-to-GDP Ratio: Comparative Analysis of Alternative Scenario of Less Favorable Terms on Public Sector Borrowing, 2006-29; 13. Macroeconomic Forecasts, 2006-29; E. Country-level heterogeneity14. External Accounts Forecasts, 2006-293. Evolution of Key Variables in DSAs; IV. Conclusions; Appendixes; Appendix Figures; Figure A1. PV of Debt-to-GDP Ratio, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A2. PV of Debt-to-Exports Ratio, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A3. PV of Debt-to-Revenue Ratio, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A4. Debt Service-to-Exports Ratio, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A5. Debt Service-to-Revenue Ratio, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A6. PV of PPG Exernal Debt, 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A7. Debt Service, 2006-29 (In billions of US)Figure A8. Nominal GDP, 2006-29 (In billions of US)Figure A9. Exports of Goods and Services, 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A10. Government Revenue, 2006-29 (in billions of US); Figure A11. Financing Needs, 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A12. New Medium and Long Term Disbursements, 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A13. Debt Accumulation Rate, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A14. Nominal Debt and Nominal GDP Growth, 2010-291 (In percent, 2010 DSAs); Figure A15. Aid flow, 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A16. Grant Element in New Disbursements, 2006-29 (In percent)Figure A17. Nominal Effective Interest Rate, 2006-29 (In percent)Figure A18. Nominal GDP Growth and Nominal Effective Interest Rate, 2010-291 (In percent, 2010 DSAs); Figure A19. Real GDP Growth, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A20. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), 2006-29 (In billions of US); Figure A21. PV of Debt-to-GDP Ratio under Historical Alternative Scenario, 2006-29 (In percent); Figure A22. PV of Debt-to-GDP Ratio: Baseline vs. Historical Alternative Scenario, 2010-291 (In percent, 2010 DSA)The Debt Sustainability Analysis (DSA) for low-income countries (LICs) is a standardized analytical tool to monitor debt sustainability. This paper uses DSAs from three periods around the time of the global economic crisis to analyze the projected trajectories of debt ratios for a sample of LICs. The aggregate data suggest that LIC vulnerabilities improved on the whole during the period prior to the crisis, and that the crisis had a strong short-run impact on key ratios of debt (debt-to-GDP, -exports, and -fiscal revenues) and debt service (debt service-to-exports, and -revenues). Although projected debt burdens increased following the crisis, debt indicators tend to return to their pre-crisis levels over the projection horizon. This may reflect a strong and durable policy response by LICs towards the crisis, or also reflect specific assumptions on the long-run growth dividends of public external debt.IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ;No. 2012/167Debts, PublicMathematical modelsDebts, PublicDeveloping countriesExports and ImportsimfInternational Lending and Debt ProblemsimfInternational economicsimfDebt sustainability analysisimfDebt sustainabilityimfExternal debtimfDebt burdenimfDebt serviceimfDebts, ExternalimfBurkina FasoimfDebts, PublicMathematical models.Debts, PublicExports and ImportsInternational Lending and Debt ProblemsInternational economicsDebt sustainability analysisDebt sustainabilityExternal debtDebt burdenDebt serviceDebts, External332.1;332.1/532;332.1532Baduel Benedicte1715892Price Robert1082908DcWaIMFBOOK9910820533703321Evolution of Debt Sustainability Analysis in Low-Income Countries4110848UNINA