This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. This paper suggests a strategy designed to make best use of the available quantitative techniques of financial sector assessment. It incorporates early warning systems, financial sector forecasts, stress tests for systemically important financial institutions, interbank contagion analysis, and corporate and household financial indicators. It will seldom be possible to employ every one of these techniques, but the wider the range of methodologies used, the greater may be the insight into the strengths and vulnerabilities of the financial sector. The quantitative assessment is always complemented by a qualitative assessment, including reviews of relevant standards and codes. JEL Classification Numbers: G20, G21, G10

This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. This paper assesses how various types of financial risk such as credit risk, market risk, and liquidity risk affect banking stability in the ten countries that joined the European Union most recently, and eight neighboring countries. It also examines how the quality of supervisory standards may have mitigated the vulnerabilities arising from these risk factors. Using panel data, the study finds substantial variation in the impacts of financial risks, the macroeconomic environment, and supervisory standards on banks' risk profile across different country clusters. Credit quality is of general concern especially in circumstances where credit growth is accelerating.

The experiences of Caribbean Economic Community countries show that exchange rate depreciation in these countries is inflationary, and that, while changes in the relative prices of tradables may affect exports, tourism, and imports, nominal exchange rate changes have no predictable effect on those relative prices. Under these circumstances, economic literature indicates that a fixed exchange rate regime is optimal, and Caribbean countries with (quasi-) currency boards have been successful in maintaining durable exchange rate pegs. Commitment to a currency board is a potentialJy vital step in achieving a currency union for the Caribbean.

No abstract

No abstract