Why don't we hear a lot more about SDRs?

This one seems a no-brainer to me.  The easiest and quickest way to create global liquidity and enable credit-starved emerging and developing countries to increase their spending is for the IMF to engineer a vast new SDR allocation.  It can be done at the stroke of a pen, and it does not require the IMF to negotiate a program for every country that needs a loan.

Let's remember some basic facts. The U.S. fiscal stimulus will be a lot less effective if it is not accompanied by similar fiscal action elsewhere. Developing nations are severely limited in what they can do in this respect because they have little room for domestic borrowing. Serious fiscal stimulus requires that they have resort to external resources, of which there is a severe shortage at the moment (both because of the flight to quality and the borrowing that is going on in the developed world).  The existing swap lines and the IMF's new short-term lending facility have had few takers, in part because no country wants to signal that they are (or may be) in trouble and running out of resources.  A generalized SDR allocation--in return for a commitment to spend a share of these resources in pursuit of a globally coordinated fiscal stimulus--would give countries the cover needed to do what is good for them and for the rest of the world without suffering a reputational penalty.

The main objection to the creation of SDRs has always been that this would be inflationary.  In the current environment, this is a plus rather than a minus.  Inflationary, you say? Pile it on! That is exactly what the doctor ordered.

So if you want to reduce protectionist pressures in the U.S. and elsewhere while helping the developing countries get over a crisis that is not their doing, SDRs can be a large part of the solution.  So I repeat my question: why don't we hear more about this? 

UPDATE:  I see that Montek Ahluwahlia has also called for an issue of SDRs, as has a group of economists around the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.  Martin Wolf's otherwise excellent column today is mysteriously silent on this obvious remedy which would do much to advance his recommendations.

Comments

[Barkley Rosser]

Good point, Dani. Actually I have been wondering for some time how and why it was that SDRs had faded so much in the system as a whole. There was a time some decades ago when there was a non-trivial coterie of countries that pegged their currencies to the SDR, an obvious strategy for having a generally stable currency while not being too closely tied to anyone in particular. As it is, I do not think there is a single country today that does, although if there is, it is not more than about one or two, and it or they would probably be pretty small or obscure (not to insult any countries out there).

[Mr. Nosuch]

Call me stupid, but I didn't know what an SDR is, so if you're going to use an acroymn with no explanation, perhaps you could link to something for some background, like this:

http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/sdr.htm

[joebhed]

I could be wrong but my guess would be that we haven't actually abrogated our sovereignty to the BIS as of yet.
Coming soon, I am sure, in a bipartisan capitulation.

[Slightly Optimistic]

For interest, here is a research paper [2001] from the IMF on considerations relevant to an allocation of SDRs. http://imf.org/external/np/tre/2001/111601.pdf

Extracts from the conclusion:

This paper considers factors relevant to the assessment of whether there is a long-term global need to supplement existing reserve assets via a general allocation of SDRs . . Executive Directors may wish, inter alia, to touch on the following issues:

· Is the current slowdown in the world economy projected by WEO relevant to a finding of long-term global need? If not, under what circumstances and in what manner would growth in the world economy be relevant?

· Should the sizable projected increase in the demand for reserves during 2002–2006 be met through an SDR allocation or through some combination of external adjustment and borrowing?

[JD]

I'm all for adding massive liquidity into the global markets right now, but the long term impact of a massive allocation of SDRs could be costly. Correct me if I'm wrong, by allocation SDRs the IMF would be letting members borrow at the basket interest rate, currently 0.65%. Undoubtedly, this is significantly below the prevailing rate on most countries debt. What would be the impact on global rates and FX in the US, UK, Euro and Japan. If big enough, would there be a significant impact? I think SDRs might be a good way to provide stimulus, but not too sure of the costs.

[Richard]

On a more practical level, new SDR allocations are difficult to do. SDR allocations require formal approval by 85% of the IMF's voting power, including approval of the U.S. Congress (due to budgetary implications, I believe). New allocations are also given out with respect to quota, meaning the countries that most need additional financing at this point would benefit little from a SDR allocation. For example, if the 27 billion SDR allocation approved in principal in 1997 were to gain approval from the U.S. Congress (which would push it over the 85% barrier), Turkey would benefit by only 0.11 million SDR. Chump change.

[Slightly Optimistic]

It would be possible "for the IMF to engineer a vast new SDR allocation". Long term global need would be the justification.

A key problem though is that the Washington-based IMF is widely perceived as biased. A member of one of the world's biggest think tanks has reported that economic initiatitives, such as this, would not be possible until the United States is ready to stop using the IMF as an instrument of U.S. policy.
Its actions are less than even-handed was how the Fund's Internal Audit put it - quite a criticism of this key UN agency. Incidentally the Internal Audit section was created primarily because of complaints about the IMF from many quarters over the years.

The amount and distribution of the 'free' money would need to be well defended. But it's well worth pursuing.

[Erik]

Great Article Dani. I couldnt agree more with you. I have been wondering for a long time why sdr's faded as well.

[Dave]

As Richard points out, the problem is that a new SDR allocation would be based on IMF quotas, meaning the majority would go to developed countries that do not need it. Also, an SDR allocation would go to all IMF member countries, including countries under U.S. sanctions (such as Sudan and Zimbabwe). This means that the U.S. would be legally required to oppose the new SDR allocation. U.S. support is required, since a SDR allocation requires 85% of votes. Not a bad idea in theory, but it doesn't work in practice.

[Slightly Optimistic]

National politics is holding up so many matters - including SDR allocations and the regulation of the global economy.

From this week's 'Economist':

"There are those who think the fund’s [IMF's] mission should go beyond doling out money to helping prevent the build-up of global financial imbalances that led to this crisis.
"Discussing reforms to the IMF’s governance is on the agenda when the leaders of the Group of 20 meet in London on April 2nd. . . The big powers will be reluctant to give ground. . . But if they do not, the risk is that the developing world will be tempted to build even larger piles of reserves to insure itself against future crises." http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13062102

[Maggie Levenstein]

The Chinese are now advocating this as well. See http://www.pbc.gov.cn/english/detail.asp?col=6500&id=178.

[rs money]

Powerleveling-Runescape.net is a professional Runescape powerleveling Service site for Runescape player.You can buy runescape money and cheap runescape gold and rs money service..

[penis enlargement]

The best recommended products for fast penis enlargement methods to get better results with no side effect visit: http://www.pennisenlargementproducts.com

[cheap jordan shoes]

An excellent post. You have explained all about cancer in detail. There is nothing left to explain now. Thanks.