Russian
(PDF)
IMF Sees European Recovery in 2010
Conditional on Further Policy Action, and Calls for Enhanced European Policy
Coordination
Press Release No. 09/159
May 12, 2009
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) today said that the severe economic
downturn in Europe could end during the second half of 2010, followed by a
gradual recovery, but that further policy actions, especially in the financial
sector, will be essential to induce this recovery. In its Spring 2009 Regional
Economic Outlook (REO) for Europe, the IMF notes economic activity is likely to
contract most in emerging economies in the region this year, although activity
may rebound slightly more in 2010 compared to the advanced economies of Europe.
For Europe’s advanced countries, the IMF forecasts a 4 percent contraction in
2009. The advance countries are still expected to record negative growth in
2010, though at a more moderate rate of 0.4 percent. For Europe’s emerging
economies, the IMF projects a 4.9 percent decline in 2009, with a return to
growth of 0.7 percent in 2010. Inflation is expected to fall to very low levels
in many countries, but outright deflation is likely to be avoided, according to
the IMF. The risks around this overall economic scenario, however, still remain
tilted to the downside, it warns. With low inflation, consumers could regain
confidence earlier, but continued weak global demand could lengthen and deepen
the recession.
“The measures taken to counteract the deep recession in Europe have provided
a good foundation for a gradual recovery, but further actions by policy makers,
particularly in the financial sector, are needed to restore market trust and
confidence, and accelerate the recovery,” said Marek Belka, Director of the
IMF’s European Department. These actions include continued provision of
liquidity and engagement in credit easing where necessary; credible loss
recognition in the financial system; recapitalization of viable institutions by
the private sector, but with public support if needed; and ring-fencing of
impaired assets where they constitute a significant part of balance sheets, and
preferably through a private sector managed bad-bank construction with
government support and funding.
Macroeconomic policies are also needed to cushion the downturn. Fiscal policy
needs to continue to support demand, combining rapid and extensive
implementation of fiscal stimulus packages with a commitment to future fiscal
consolidation. Monetary policy should be used to anchor inflation expectations
solidly in positive territory, preempting deflationary risks.
“What is mostly needed is a robust approach to coordination, in particular on
financial and regional macroeconomic stability,” Belka said. “Europe is the most
economically integrated market economy in the world, and yet the policies to
address the crisis have been undertaken at the national level. Without a
well-coordinated effort in these areas, neither fiscal nor monetary policy
efforts will work as effectively as they must to make sure that Europe is as
vibrant and prosperous after the crisis as it was before. Europe is facing the
economic storm of a lifetime and it urgently needs to weatherproof its
institutions,” added Belka, who also called for improving the EU’s financial
stability framework, going beyond the recommendations suggested earlier in 2009
in the report by the High-Level Group of Financial Supervision in the EU,
chaired by Jacques de Larosière.
Brief Summary of the Analytic Chapters in the 2009 Spring REO
Chapter 2 of the 2009 Spring REO, entitled “Fiscal
Policy in Advanced Economies: Effectiveness, Coordination, and Solvency Issues,”
concludes that while it is important for countries to support their economies in
the face of an unprecedented slowdown, a clear and credible commitment to
long-run fiscal discipline is now more essential than ever before: any loss of
market confidence may lead to increases in long-term real interest rates and
debt-service costs, partly offsetting the stimulus effects of measures taken to
deal with the crisis and further adding to financing pressures. Any short-term
fiscal action will have to be cast within a credible medium-term fiscal
framework and envisage a fiscal correction as the crisis abates.
Chapter 3, entitled “European Emerging Market in Crisis:
Impact and Recovery,” looks at the impact of the global financial crisis on
emerging Europe and finds that for emerging market countries that became EU
members, adherence to EU rules and institutions has helped to mitigate the
impact of the crisis, although it has not shielded them completely. Also, the so
called “EU halo effect”—or the phenomenon of lower bond spreads for New Member
States in spite of rising vulnerabilities in some countries—has disappeared,
while cross-country differences have increased. The chapter concludes that while
the external environment and structural reform efforts will matter, the banking
sector, which has played a central role in the run-up to the crisis, holds a key
to the speed of recovery from the crisis. In the short term, bank
recapitalizations seem unavoidable to prevent recessions from becoming
protracted. In the medium term, recovery efforts will need to be supported by a
strengthening of financial stability arrangements, including for cross-border
activities, and the introduction of more forward-looking provisioning policies.
European Countries: Real GDP Growth
and CPI Inflation, 2006–10 (Percent)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real GDP Growth |
CPI Inflation |
|
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
|
Europe
1/ 2/ |
4.1 |
3.9 |
1.8 |
-4.2 |
-0.1 |
3.6 |
3.6 |
5.7 |
2.9 |
2.5 |
Advanced European
economies 1/ |
3.1 |
2.9 |
0.9 |
-4.0 |
-0.4 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
3.4 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
Emerging European
economies 1/ 2/ |
7.2 |
6.8 |
4.3 |
-4.9 |
0.7 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
12.0 |
9.2 |
7.1 |
European Union 1/ |
3.4 |
3.1 |
1.1 |
-4.0 |
-0.3 |
2.3 |
2.4 |
3.7 |
0.8 |
0.8 |
Euro area |
2.9 |
2.7 |
0.9 |
-4.2 |
-0.4 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
3.3 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
Austria |
3.4 |
3.1 |
1.8 |
-3.0 |
0.2 |
1.7 |
2.2 |
3.2 |
0.5 |
1.3 |
Belgium |
3.0 |
2.6 |
1.1 |
-3.8 |
0.3 |
2.3 |
1.8 |
4.5 |
0.5 |
1.0 |
Cyprus |
4.1 |
4.4 |
3.7 |
0.3 |
2.1 |
2.2 |
2.2 |
4.4 |
0.9 |
2.4 |
Finland |
4.9 |
4.2 |
0.9 |
-5.2 |
-1.2 |
1.3 |
1.6 |
3.9 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
France |
2.4 |
2.1 |
0.7 |
-3.0 |
0.4 |
1.9 |
1.6 |
3.2 |
0.5 |
1.0 |
Germany |
3.0 |
2.5 |
1.3 |
-5.6 |
-1.0 |
1.8 |
2.3 |
2.8 |
0.1 |
-0.4 |
Greece |
4.5 |
4.0 |
2.9 |
-0.2 |
-0.6 |
3.3 |
3.0 |
4.2 |
1.6 |
2.1 |
Ireland |
5.7 |
6.0 |
-2.3 |
-8.0 |
-3.0 |
2.7 |
2.9 |
3.1 |
-0.6 |
1.0 |
Italy |
2.0 |
1.6 |
-1.0 |
-4.4 |
-0.4 |
2.2 |
2.0 |
3.5 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
Luxembourg |
6.4 |
5.2 |
0.7 |
-4.8 |
-0.2 |
2.7 |
2.3 |
3.4 |
0.2 |
1.8 |
Malta |
3.2 |
3.6 |
1.6 |
-1.5 |
1.1 |
2.6 |
0.7 |
4.7 |
1.8 |
1.7 |
Netherlands |
3.4 |
3.5 |
2.0 |
-4.8 |
-0.7 |
1.7 |
1.6 |
2.2 |
0.3 |
1.1 |
Portugal |
1.4 |
1.9 |
0.0 |
-4.1 |
-0.5 |
3.0 |
2.4 |
2.6 |
0.3 |
1.0 |
Slovak Republic |
8.5 |
10.4 |
6.4 |
-2.1 |
1.9 |
4.3 |
1.9 |
3.9 |
1.7 |
2.3 |
Slovenia |
5.9 |
6.8 |
3.5 |
-2.7 |
1.4 |
2.5 |
3.6 |
5.7 |
0.5 |
1.5 |
Spain |
3.9 |
3.7 |
1.2 |
-3.0 |
-0.7 |
3.6 |
2.8 |
4.1 |
0.0 |
0.9 |
Other EU
advanced economies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denmark |
3.3 |
1.6 |
-1.1 |
-4.0 |
0.4 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
3.4 |
-0.3 |
0.0 |
Sweden |
4.2 |
2.6 |
-0.2 |
-4.3 |
0.2 |
1.5 |
1.7 |
3.3 |
-0.2 |
0.0 |
United Kingdom |
2.8 |
3.0 |
0.7 |
-4.1 |
-0.4 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
3.6 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
New EU countries1/ |
6.6 |
5.9 |
4.0 |
-2.9 |
0.2 |
3.2 |
4.3 |
6.5 |
3.0 |
2.3 |
Bulgaria |
6.3 |
6.2 |
6.0 |
-2.0 |
-1.0 |
7.4 |
7.6 |
12.0 |
3.7 |
1.3 |
Czech Republic |
6.8 |
6.0 |
3.2 |
-3.5 |
0.1 |
2.5 |
2.9 |
6.3 |
1.0 |
1.6 |
Hungary |
4.0 |
1.1 |
0.6 |
-3.3 |
-0.4 |
3.9 |
7.9 |
6.1 |
3.8 |
2.8 |
Poland |
6.2 |
6.7 |
4.8 |
-0.7 |
1.3 |
1.0 |
2.5 |
4.2 |
2.1 |
2.6 |
Romania |
7.9 |
6.2 |
7.1 |
-4.1 |
0.0 |
6.6 |
4.8 |
7.8 |
5.9 |
3.9 |
Estonia |
10.4 |
6.3 |
-3.6 |
-10.0 |
-1.0 |
4.4 |
6.6 |
10.4 |
0.8 |
-1.3 |
Latvia |
12.2 |
10.0 |
-4.6 |
-12.0 |
-2.0 |
6.6 |
10.1 |
15.3 |
3.3 |
-3.5 |
Lithuania |
7.8 |
8.9 |
3.0 |
-10.0 |
-3.0 |
3.8 |
5.8 |
11.1 |
5.1 |
0.6 |
Non-EU advanced
economies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iceland |
4.5 |
5.5 |
0.3 |
-10.6 |
-0.2 |
6.8 |
5.0 |
12.4 |
10.6 |
2.4 |
Israel |
5.2 |
5.4 |
3.9 |
-1.7 |
0.3 |
2.1 |
0.5 |
4.7 |
1.4 |
0.8 |
Norway |
2.3 |
3.1 |
2.0 |
-1.7 |
0.3 |
2.3 |
0.7 |
3.8 |
1.5 |
1.9 |
Switzerland |
3.4 |
3.3 |
1.6 |
-3.0 |
-0.3 |
1.0 |
0.7 |
2.4 |
-0.6 |
-0.3 |
Other emerging
economies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albania |
5.5 |
6.3 |
6.8 |
0.4 |
2.0 |
2.4 |
2.9 |
3.4 |
1.5 |
2.2 |
Belarus |
10.0 |
8.6 |
10.0 |
-4.3 |
1.6 |
7.0 |
8.4 |
14.8 |
12.6 |
6.0 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
6.9 |
6.8 |
5.5 |
-3.0 |
0.5 |
6.1 |
1.5 |
7.4 |
2.1 |
2.3 |
Croatia |
4.7 |
5.5 |
2.4 |
-3.5 |
0.3 |
3.2 |
2.9 |
6.1 |
2.5 |
2.8 |
Macedonia, FYR |
4.0 |
5.9 |
5.0 |
-2.0 |
1.0 |
3.2 |
2.3 |
8.3 |
1.0 |
3.0 |
Moldova |
4.8 |
4.0 |
7.2 |
-3.4 |
0.0 |
12.7 |
12.4 |
12.7 |
2.6 |
4.7 |
Montenegro |
8.6 |
10.7 |
7.5 |
-2.7 |
-2.0 |
2.1 |
3.5 |
9.0 |
1.7 |
-0.2 |
Russia |
7.7 |
8.1 |
5.6 |
-6.0 |
0.5 |
9.7 |
9.0 |
14.1 |
12.9 |
9.9 |
Serbia |
5.2 |
6.9 |
5.4 |
-2.0 |
0.0 |
12.7 |
6.5 |
11.7 |
10.0 |
8.2 |
Turkey |
6.9 |
4.7 |
1.1 |
-5.1 |
1.5 |
9.6 |
8.8 |
10.4 |
6.9 |
6.8 |
Ukraine |
7.3 |
7.9 |
2.1 |
-8.0 |
1.0 |
9.0 |
12.8 |
25.2 |
16.8 |
10.0 |
|
Source: IMF, World Economic Outlook
1/ Average weighted by PPP GDP.
2/ Montenegro is excluded from the
aggregate calculations.
|
|
|