AmarAkkerman

Kuteesa,
and
HIPC
Myths
Relief
Edited
Jan
Age
FONDAD
Rosetti
Joost
Bhattacharya,
Debt
and
byMatthew
Reality
Teunissen
Nayenga
Martin,
Geske
and Mothae
Dijkstra,
Maruping,
Martin Wayne
Gilman,Mitchell
Florence
HIPC Debt
From:
FONDAD,
HIPC
February
Relief:
Debt Relief
2004,
Mythswww.fondad.org
-and
Myths
Reality
and Reality
Forum
FONDAD
international
by
research
emphasis
seminars
background
and
Director:
countries.
From:
FONDAD,
aother
worldwide
onisFebruary
HIPC Debt
on
and
anDebt
interested
Jan
information
apublications,
international
independent
and
discussion
range
Joost
network
Relief
2004,
Development
ofgroups
Teunissen
ofMyths
North-South
-and
www.fondad.org
policy
established
experts,
financial
FONDAD
practical
in(FONDAD)
industrial,
and
research
aims
itissues.
problems,
Reality
inprovides
strategies
tothe
centre
provide
developing
Netherlands.
Through
with
policy-oriented
andfactual
forparticular
forum
research,
policymakers
andSupported
for
transition
HIPCHague
Myths
Edited
Jan
Age
The
FONDAD
From:
FONDAD,
Joost
Akkerman
Debt
and
HIPC
byFebruary
Relief
Reality
Teunissen
Debt Relief
2004,
andwww.fondad.org
- Myths and Reality
ISBN:31-70-3653820
Copyright:
Permission
republication,
Additional
Noordeinde
Tel:
From:
FONDAD,
90-74208-23-1
HIPC
February
ForumA,
must
copies
107
Debt photocopying,
be2004,
Relief
on2514
may
obtained
Fax:
Debt
bewww.fondad.org
-GE31-70-3463939
and
ordered
Myths
Thefrom
Development
or
Hague,
and
other
FONDAD
from
Reality
the
useprior
FONDAD
E-Mail:
(FONDAD),
Netherlands
of at
this
to any
a.bulnes@fondad.org
work.
2004.
further reprints,
Acknowledgements
Contents
Notes
Abbreviations
1Glossary
Jan
Lessons
Criticisms
2The
Matthew
Key
Development?
Does
Will
Is
3What
UgandaÕs
Florence
Debt
Poverty
HIPC
Challenges
From:
FONDAD,
Introduction
Assessing
HIPC
Debt
Joost
Long
Future
HIPC
Needs
It
HIPC
Could
Relief
and
onDebt
HIPC
from
Martin
Provide
Make
Protect
Supply
Fund
Relief
Reduction
February
the
xiii
Way
Myths
Experience
N.
Debt
Teunissen
Conditionality
toBefore
of
HIPC
for
Debt
the
Relief
Kuteesa
Contributors
to
All
26
the
xithe
the
Be
HIPC
Sustainability
and
Additional
Preferable
the
HIPC
Debt
Against
Achieve?
Relief
vii
1980s
Done?
Creditors
Millennium
2004,
HIPC
50
Debt
Realities
and
Future
HIPC
and
Initiative:
Sustainability?
Debt
8Initiative
Poverty
-After
www.fondad.org
Relief
Exogenous
Rosetti
Initiative
Accelerate
38
Myths
viii
Finance
to
56Share
Saga
Development
11and
Other
HIPC
52 9N.the
Reduction
148
The
6Reality
Shocks?
for
Financing?
Nayenga
4Burden?
the
KeyMDGs?
12 Goals?
HIPC
Strategies:
22 1935
Debates
31
28
4 Debt
Mothae
in
Broader
5Building
the
Wayne
Key
Progress
Implementation
Impact
Reducing
Creditor
Challenges
Debt
Review
6Maintaining
Development
Amar
What
7Achieving
Geske
Netherlands
The
Adverse
Conclusion
From:
FONDAD,
Lessons
Achievements
From
Africa
HIPC
IMF
Features
Role
Lack
Financing
Sustainability
Bhattacharya
the
Mitchell
Dijkstra
HIPC
Maruping
on
of
Debt
Relief
National
Effects
February
Initiative
Capacity
in
Expenditures
Participation
HIPC
of
from
58
Debt
the
70Additionality
Ahead
106
129
Debt
Implementation
Debt
Relief
Goals
Donors
ofof
Initiative
MDGs
from
Eastern
to
and
Update
Stocks,
Sustainability
the
of
Relief
and
for
Sustainability
Debt
2004,
for
Date
Martin
to
a102
in
Conditionality
and
HIPC
inInternational
the
Donor
Debt
78
80
Achieving
Perpetuating
Relief
and
Debt
84
-HIPCs
www.fondad.org
Other
Initiative
HIPC
Can
Myths
Gilman
115
Southern
Management
Challenges
78
Perspective:
Service
8989
and
inDebt
Initiative
and
Beyond
the
Cannot
123
Initiatives
Development
Debt
Reality
Africa
74
and
Millennium
Netherlands
69HIPC
Ahead:
Poverty
Yield
The
Problems
87 Case
92A98View
66118
of the
111 from
This
Acknowledgements
vii
Governance
and
this
Prevention
under-secretary-general
United
Caribbean
FONDAD
FONDAD.
Dutch
Martin
preparing
by
Nederlandsche
to
their
Athe
contributed.
who
Age
Jan
February,
From:
FONDAD,
special
the
Matthew
Southern
workshop,
assisted
Akkerman
Joost
book
project,
Ministry
thorough
HIPC
Nations
very
and
Dutch
February
is
(ECLAC),
an
thanks
Teunissen
2004.
Initiative
and
colleagues
Martin,
Debt
much
yet
perspectives
international
ministries
in
FONDAD
Bank,
and
Response,
and
Economic
of
revising
the
Relief
another
appreciates
goes
2004,
Foreign
to
until
and
Florence
from
publishing
is
the
(GFGI),
ofwww.fondad.org
to-Jan
responsible
for
Commission
of
and
result
jointly
September
Debt
which
other
Adriana
Myths
on
Affairs.
Joost
workshop
Foreign
Economic
Kuteesa
updating
key
the
which
Relief
this
authors
of
and
from
international
chaired
Teunissen,
continuing
Bulnes
this
2003
for
Thanks
Affairs
Reality
brings
for
(August
book
and
the
andbook.
International
of Latin
for
the
executive
Mothae
and
Global
by
Social
emerges.
are
together
and
the
working
Jos
director
support
2002),
papers
Julie
America
due
financial
Finance
Maruping
chapters
Financial
Affairs
Antonio
secretary
to
We
B.
who
jointly
they
Northern
group
ofRaadschelders
andand
of
Matthew
arethe
helped
of
for
presented
they
issues.
the
grateful
Ocampo,
Crisis
the
sponsored
De
ofinthe
Inat
Notes
Amar
Economic
spokesperson
aworks
private
countries,
Asia
involvement
Country
Pacific,
joining
Geske
Erasmus
Central
on
Agency.
economic
the
out
Dutch
Martin
Development
debt
Paris
drafted
senior
convertibility
From:
viii
FONDAD,
special
aid
First
Institute
Evaluation
for
Bhattacharya
crisis.
and
onresident
with
Dijkstra
Ministry
Club.
HIPC
issues,
Gilman
capital
Operations,
University
America,
She
athe
February
the
Management
and
liberalisation,
official
World
National
book
the
and
Debt
inwas
World
Bank,
has
Policy
and
InContributors
on
Since
ofquestions,
(1948)
International
was
the
(1956)
among
Report
of
2001-2002
about
the
Bank
flows
published
Review
representative
Relief
chief
she
Social
2004,
(1952)
Bank,
and
Foreign
financing
part
joining
East
Bank
Rotterdam.
and
Network
BankÕs
Indonesia,
study
first
others,
is
Russia.
and
is
the
onofficer
Operations
-Department
www.fondad.org
Asia
he
of
Studies
assistant
isreview
associate
gender
International
he
Myths
financial
Swedish
on
Affairs.
financial
that
the
worked
Chicago.
joined
senior
at
questions,
taught
Monetary
region,
for
the
Prior
After
the
BankÕs
Bank,
Papua
for
in
and
examined
in
and
the
effectiveness
of
asReality
the
International
Evaluation
director
responsible
Moscow.
advisor,
World
Country
professor
The
economics
to
integration
working
debt.
negotiating
architecture
he
including
New
an
World
Fund.
senior
Maastricht
that,
Hague.
Debt
representing
has
international
Bank.
the
Guinea
She
Earlier,
Creditworthiness.
Bank,
in
Poverty
aHe
for
Relief
he
policy
team
Department
inlong-standing
She
was
the
for
Hebriefs
was
division
of
worked
for
and
economics
several
Development
Moscow
University
the
ishe
and
focusing
has
aid,
the
IMFÕs
sovereign
team
1990-1999
Reduction
implications
developing
the
the
Inter-American
how
economist
been
coordinator
as
dealt
the
and
for
leader
chief
South
years
of
Policy
IMF
key
the
the
at
onwith
consultant
impact
the
economic
and
at
Prior
the
carried
IMFÕs
and
Bank
the
for
in
ofthen
the
atofof
East
to
Notes
adjustment
in
Economics,
Florence
Finance,
study
Master
Manchester
Planning
moved
for
she
Poverty
of
Matthew
which
strategies
official
the
Development
consultant
organisations
debt
Mothae
and
Southern
UBLS
Washington
economics
University
pro-vice
to
Lesotho
has
From:
FONDAD,
1981,
Pennsylvania.
the
1986.
inin
the
is
Overseas
Financial
also
and
onMaruping
in
to
build
HIPC
England.
ain
Council
coordination
Reduction
Martin
Lesotho,
from
February
after
Kuteesa
Planning
economics
the
member
and
development
Africa
chancellor
In
served
human
atprogrammes
as
(UK),
for
to
D.C.
of
Debt
Finance
developing
Centre
1988,
Contributors
Economic
Budget
private
Development
the
where
well
many
and
Management
Lesotho.
working
for
(1962)
managing
He2004,
resource
for
(1944)
(MEFMI)
and
in
Relief
(1960)
she
the
Lincoln
and
Network
NGOs.
he
holds
as
at
Economic
in
donors,
he
corporate,
Policy
Uganda
International,
the
of
started
of
development
financing.
Catholic
became
and
from
Economic
the
Development
is
Oxford,
moved
atUniversity
countriesÕ
is
He
-the
www.fondad.org
isMyths
the
external
He
indegrees
development
director
Institute
University
ixNational
G-7
Makerere
and
the
was
Johns
acting
Department
of
African
has
Harare.
budget
Empowerment
the
toher
coordination.
OECD
the
since
and
executive
University
dean
national,
Development
co-authored
his
and
governor
from
Hopkins
career
and
financing.
director
in
Executive
of
capacities
the
and
University
process
both
in
governments,
He
of
current
Reality
1999
in
University
atSocial
Uganda.
Debt
domestic
the
as
London,
World
Eastern
holds
Baltimore.
teaching
the
the
in
of
non-profit
director
and
University
commissioner
chairperson
ofLondon
Relief
budget
in
1983
and
Women
books
US
position
HeSciences
Victoria
Committee
Previously
Bank,
degrees
America
the
international
Inand
toUganda.
in
debt,
the
joined
reforms.
ofeconomics
at
1998,
design
international
Central
School
Uganda
in
International
and
of
Heinorganisations
International
and
at
Lesotho
the
Africa.
and
the
from
has
in
University
for
articles
the
the
After
she
responsible
on
as
and
Ministry
and
he
1998.
ofNational
University
and
Since
external
Macroeconomic
taught
Bank
Ministry
African
aUganda
the
IMF
in
worked
later
from
boards.
implement
her
Paris
of
He
1997,
onand
1982
ofatof
the
Wayne
economist
that
questions,
assignments
that,
where
developing
securities
of
Rosetti
Indies.
Monitoring
Planning
key
UgandaÕs
Agricultural
at
institutions
government
DFID,
xpublished
From:
FONDAD,
HIPC
Illinois
the
role
isHIPC
Mitchell
he
his
EU,
Economic
Debt
responsible
Nabbumba
February
worked
and
in
poverty
inDebt
responsibilities
IFPRI,
mainly
the
and
have
at
collating
Relief:
theinternational
Economic
Economics
in (1965)
also
institutional
equities
Urbana-Champaign
Analysis
at2004,
Policy
Uganda.
Relief
IMFÕs
included
Nayenga
reports
EENESA,
on the
forpoverty-monitoring
represents
agricultural
Myths
joined
Development
Policy
Eastern
Department,
-Research
www.fondad.org
sovereign
markets.
Unit
She
(1968)
and
ISNAR,
Myths
Lesotho,
and
have
has
the
framework
(PMAU)
budget
agencies
Development
Reality
the
Caribbean
and
included
is
Centre
been
and
IMF
He
policy.
debt
in
IMF
Estonia
policy
Makerere
Reality
holds
the
of
documents.
UNCTAD,
inincluding
aUganda,
atUniversity
for
the
and
consultant
September
Central
public
data
and
the
degrees
analyst
official
and
the
Ministry
other
University,
and
where
Review
Paris
and
Uganda.
regional
She
debt
the
has
Bank
agricultural
2001
from
in
contributing
to
ofWorld
she
worked
financing
Club.
of
Department
management
the
UgandaÕs
from
the
asand
Prior
the
Finance,
plays
government
Poverty
anUniversity
His
West
at
Bank,
1991
later
atomission
thetoand
AERCEuropean
Abbreviations
xi
AfDB
AfDF
BWIs
CABEI
CAFOD
CIRR
lending
DAC
DFID
OECD
DSA
ECAs
EIB
ESAF
ESAIDARM
and
EU
EURODAD
FDI
G-7
Japan,
G-8
GDP
GNI
GNP
HIPCs
HIPC
IADB
IBRD
Development
From:
FONDAD,
Development
Debt
European
Reserves
foreign
Group
gross
African
Bretton
rates
Department
export
IEnhanced
II
Inter-American
International
Central
Catholic
heavily
HIPC
UK,
original
rates
European
Enhanced
February
Sustainability
Eastern
ofDebt
domestic
national
Commercial
US)
credit
Union
direct
(World
Economic
Development
Woods
Investment
Management
Seven
Eight
American
of
Structural
indebted
Agency
Assistance
for
HIPC
Relief
export
and
Network
HIPC
2004,
institutions
agencies
investment
(Canada,
(G-7
income
product
Bank
Bank)
International
Development
Southern
Initiative
Research
for
Interest
Initiative
Bank
-poor
www.fondad.org
credit
Analysis
+Bank
for
Bank
Fund
Adjustment
on
Myths
Overseas
Russia)
Committee
forAfrican
Debt
France,
countries
Reconstruction
Consortium
Reference
agencies)
and
Economic
(1996)
Bank
and
(1999)
Development
Development
Reality
Facility
Germany,
ofInitiative
Development
the
Integration
Rates
andItaly,
(UK)
(official
in Debt
IDAWorld
IFIs
IMF
IOB
the
MDGs
MEFMI
Institute
NCM
NEPAD
NGO
NPV
ODA
OECD
OED
OPEC
Bank)
PAF
PRGF
PRSC
PRSP
PV
SADC
SDR
SILICs
SIMICs
SPA
STABEX
used
TRIPS
UK
rights
UN
UNCTAD
US
Development
WB
xii
From:
FONDAD,
present
United
International
Policy
Dutch
non-governmental
net
official
Operations
Poverty
special
Special
HIPC
international
Millennium
Organisation
Organization
poverty
Southern
both
Macroeconomic
New
trade-related
HIPC
severely-indebted
multiple-purpose
United
present
February
Bank
Debt
Ministry
of
export
Partnership
for
Kingdom
Nations
States
and
value
Debt
Action
drawing
Programme
Eastern
development
reducing
reduction
African
development
Nations
Relief:
Operations
Evaluation
Development
value
Relief
credit
(see
2004,
Development
Monetary
for
of
financial
of
Fund
and
right
aspects
and
organisation
the
Foreign
for
(see
Economic
growth
Glossary)
Development
of
Conference
Myths
support
-strategy
www.fondad.org
Financial
agency
(Uganda)
funding
Southern
assistance
Petroleum
lower-income
middle-income
Assistance
Myths
Evaluation
AfricaÕs
Department
and
Fund
Glossary)
Goals
of
and
institutions
facility
Association
Affairs
trade
Cooperation
credit
intellectual
and
paper
instrument
Reality
onCommunity
Management
Africa
Development
Exporting
Reality
policies
Trade
Department
(of
countries
countries
the
and
and
ofproperty
World
Countries
theofEU
Completion
Glossary
xiii
structural
implementation
receives
conditions.
point:
Mozambique,
Cutoff
order
12
typically
Debt
long-term
Decision
begins
Enhanced
in
HIPCs
countries
criteria
Òpotential
$785,
World
London
to
debt
comparable
From:
FONDAD,
months
1999
determine
Overhang:
to
toClub:
(heavily
with
Bank
HIPC
Benin,
Date:
on
atoinclude
February
the
be
Point:
HIPC
before
remains
capacity
an
defined
country.
Point:
reforms
provide
need
entitlement
and
to
Debt
AsaAn
Nicaragua,
eligible
bulk
The
interim
Bolivia,
Initiative:
the
ofRelief
The
indebted
from
common
The
for
informal
date
the
assessment
2004,
The
its
of
January
fixed
by
Paris
agreed
excess
to
deeper,
The
date
HIPC
the
HIPC
for
date
basis,
the
date
poverty
prior
pay.
approach
Burkina
Tanzania,
to
-London
www.fondad.org
inMyths
poor
IMFÕs
Club.
rescheduling.
at
IMF
debt
grouping
atbroader
debt
2004,
Aof
borrow
atby
all
which
to
major
athe
countries):
and
which
reduction
reliefÓ
PRGF.
Club
relief
Faso,
which
subsequent
countryÕs
be
the
to
and
10on
HIPC
and
first
World
HIPC
followed
review
of
rescheduling
countries
and
World
does
Reality
acommercial
IDA-only
Guyana,
Uganda.
loans
country
decision
without
and
The
rescheduling
debt
quicker
Bank
strategy.
not
external
of
There
Bank
rescheduling.
per
must
cutoff
by
relief
the
as
have
reached
Mali,
terms
completes
further
HIPC
and
capita
point,
debt
are
HIPCs.
commercial
beaIMF
HIPC
banks
The
date
debt
Mauritania,
contracted
is
completion
currently
from
secretariat
agreement
relief.
completion
Initiative
income
including
country
policy
committed
HIPC
showing
who
isthebank
over usually
meet
key
its
below
42apoint.
then
in
andand6 to
Millennium
reduction
NPV
Paris
Development
rescheduling
aguaranteed
individual
the
as
Poverty
countryÕs
programmes
associated
order
PRGF
service
contractual
value,
PV
mis-described
From:
xiv
FONDAD,
series
the
(Present
equals
(Net
Enhanced
Glossary
and
Club:
for
HIPC
IMFÕs
whereas
Reduction
at
February
Present
of
IDA
and
amacroeconomic,
the
Development
export
creditor
to
aexternal
Debt
The
Assistance
bilateral
country
Value)
rate
ofas
Structural
concessional
given
development
promote
market
ifRelief
forum
the
Value):
of
Net
2004,
credits.
and
Strategy
the
(of
rate
debts
some
financing
to
the
value
Present
ofwww.fondad.org
agreements
Growth
growth
rate
Goals
Committee
qualify
-debt):
Adjustment
of
debt,
See
creditor
time
structural
Myths
agreed
owed
lending
lending,
Rescheduling
Papers
Paper
interest.
of (MDGs):
PV.
Facility
and
Value.
after
needs
The
by
interest
the
todefinition,
for
andbydebt.
of
negotiated
(PRSP):
reduce
governments
them
facility,
(PRSPs).
discounted
Facility
multilateral
it
Reality
the
and
Goals
If
(PRGF):
must
ÐPresent
is
United
OECD
is
Paris
social
poverty,
major
the
mainly
PRSPs
the
for
actually
produce
separately
(ESAF)
which
rate
tomarket
sum
PVbelonging
Club
Established
sources
poverty
Nations
describe
policies
negotiate
aid
debt
equals
Value
asprovides
of agreement.
ain
loans
put
well
all
interest
relief,
PRSP.
interest
1987.
of
is
infuture
by
the
tosometimes
into
the
and
asas
financing.
2000.
the
and
each
the
finance
nominal
Used
effect
access
is
rate,
debt
thefor
by
In
then
1Introduction
Jan
When
Dutch
organise
indebted
first
so
In
at
diplomatic,
Forum
in
HIPC
ÒThe
of
During
to
with
ÒNo,Ó
rather
ÒCome
Lessons
The
debt
From:
FONDAD,
many
my
three
the
me
Joost
first
IHIPC
Initiative
us.Ó
problem
Ministry
thought
opening
spontaneous
on
Iand
on,Ó
was
debt
the
years?
answered,
from
February
aninternational
poor
Debt
years
Teunissen
said
asked
coffee
officials
she
Debt
international
but
problem,Ó
the
ofcountries
was:
remarks
and
ofRelief
They
time
with
said,
still
could
should
developing
inamused,
1980s
2004,
Foreign
(but
Development
break,
ÒGosh,
early
should
to
an
inIbe
Òwetowww.fondad.org
provocative,
silenced)
organise
just
ironic
-Debt
(HIPCs)
stressed.
the
workshop
the
made
one
share
Myths
summer
Affairs
workshop
why
ÒIhave
countries
achieve
rich
Saga
workshop
of
wasnÕt
did
(FONDAD)
more
smile
part
and
could
resolved
yet
the
ofthey
outcry
Icountries.Ó
whether
onof
terms,
effective.
organised
Reality
2002
another
what
Ugandan
ÒYou
blaming
dates
how
be
in
let
would
the
inhave
bysaying
made
August
itIback
debt
this
somewhat
blame.Ó
officials
was
long
workshop
is
participants
you
not
onmore
been
relief
meant
willing
problem
2002,
so
how
to
ago!Ó
that
be effective,
pretty
much,
March
more
asked
to
onIfor
to ofresolve
to1984.
drag
hinted
hoped
how
do:
the
came
but
heavily
tough
the
get
onthe
mythe
for
rid
 1 See for an account of her view and that of other economists, including the lat
FONDAD,
presented
were,
Basically,
crisis
system
Woods
Europe
rates
extension
very
debt
In
the
Obviously,
analysis.
could
convert
of
2bankers
From:
eRobert
or
mentioned
half
Mexico
banks.
to
The
even
blame
borrowed
As
policies.
ample
Concei
Introduction
See
TavaresÕ
interest
Scandal?Ó,
blame
chair
debt
key
foreign
meeting
western
rich
high
crisis
after
dismiss
for
system
at
be
HIPC
onto
room
ao
had
to
Triffin,
could
Atcurrency,
Ðdefaulting
February
crisis
the
easily
for
countries
too
of
Tavares,
athe
reform
of
interest
And
one
an
in
her
deep
been
some
Debt
the
tolarge
in
succinct
Ðdebt
took
banks,
that
in
end
roll-over
explanation
footnote
no
the
their
much,
view
when
as
of
In:
atime,
argument
August
international
developing
in
roots
operating
1944.
European
resolved
Relief
Jan
longer
Brazilian
of
had
the
2004,
place
emergence
March
part,
first
Alternatives,
who
that
1982.1
rates
she
debts
or
and
responsibility.
adjusted
the
Joost
discussions
system
and
been
participants,
in
The
1982.
1.
the
had
credits
-suggested
www.fondad.org
in
repay
the
1984
the
to
boiled
led
1970s
United
how
(to
intriguing
officials
by
into
Myths
of
since
lack
proposed
Teunissen,
Amsterdam
rich
countries,
professor
abe
of
western
United
and
to
establishing
this
too
workshop
different
the
repay
debt
its
held
and
long-term
the
down
of
an
by
States!Ó2
and
countries?
the
de-link
Vol.
often
little,
international
that
uncommon
debts
will
explosion
then,
the
crisis
debt
States
responsible
the
disagreed
by
an
Reality
banks
Instead,
to
establishment
synthesis:
and
ofÒThe
XII,
accusing
in
banks
the
some
official
included
analysis.
the
of
banks),
to
crisis:
economics,
it
as
loans
was
and
Amsterdam,
atended
erupted
and
the
Latin
International
No.
statement,
thesis
afrom
special
Brazilian
of
to
held
they
pursued
consequence
with
Western
United
with
3,
western
them
for
monetary
international
debtor
to
ÒIt
from
the
the
American
to
She
app.
in
shifted
that
of
the
TavaresÕ
Maria
the
all
aagency
year
issue
poor
downplay
Iof
US
the
August
bad
eloquently
the
7States
and
359-395,
my
gave
Europe
countries
outbreak
commercial
having
emergence
the
dollar
started
percent
and
Dutch
Monetary
article
countries,
economic
da
Bretton
of
debt
American
(most
that
debt
1982
financial
and
the
ainterest
who
oras
central
July
of
with
would
rate
of)
at
in
when
was
of
Crunch:
the
1987. Crisis
Alternatives
the
Janthe
bank,
solution.
example,
Moreover,
solutions
commercial
the
are
need
circumstances
would
What
ago?
The
delaying
sufficient
that
finally
Brady)
American
Second,
together
lot
In
cartel,
World
debtor
Third,
successful
developing
Even
creditworthiness
America
unemployment
Can
answering
action
(including
HIPC
From:
FONDAD,
1989,
Joost
ministries
not
first
about
similar
the
lessons
Many,
would
though
Initiative,
said:
agree
Bank
HIPC
were
meantime,
developing
the
on
eager
adopted
the
is
February
isthe
agreement
debt
Brady
countries.
and
Teunissen
The
these
because
lesson
forming
that
bank
but
time
have
as
creditor
in
countries
called
the
Debt
aÒIand
to
created
debtor
Paris
adjustment
lessons
can
negotiate
countries
completely
to
it
reduction
instruments
convincing
part
have
of
Isuch
bonds
question,
IMF
countries
loans
to
which
Relief
bail
we
want
is
the
and
social
mention
2004,
they
afinance
Club,
countries.
the
build
come.
countries
of
and
3investor
aabsolutely
learn
that
to
debtorsÕ
countries
be
(named
creditor
toproblem
in
out
solution.Ó
to
previously
Òlost
the
fear
asubstantially
and
drawn
-the
www.fondad.org
with
measures.
and
ÒadjustÓ
suffering.
different
highlight
up
After
quicker
I(others
the
Myths
themselves
and
the
industrial
from
to
policymakers
liberalisation
will
World
they
reserves
after
almost
decadeÓ
high
future.
creditor
were
cartel,
ÒguideÓ
for
major
with
central
banks.
countries
and
confidence,
unthinkable
this
seven
and
say
had
might
and
the
Bank)
debt
In
unable
the
these
case
only
full
criticisms
Reality
debt
aof
are
Indeed,
For
countries.
this
for
years,
been
reduce
better
but
the
liberalise
HIPC
banks
countries
US
IMF
few
are
be
say:
low
of
prior
from
three
had
control
designs
not
such
debate
the
minister
to
it
economic
cut
way,
said
and
helped
it
case?
words
the
very
that
economic
aofto
the
get
solution.
never
their
forcing)
that
interested
Jan
eventual
also
aoff
global
World
rich
of
the
they
todifferent.
bail-out,
In
the
of
were
debt
over
their
Before
about
launching
for
Joost
them.
them
the
from
be
of
got
own
policies
led
industrial
the
twenty
countries
USInitiative,
gave
Bank
growth,
athe
South
consciously
solution
ÒunthinkableÓ.
finance
burden
the
debt
acts
They
off
effective
economies.
to
global
access
is
present
Congress
inwhat
the
IMF
were
debtor
regain
right
we
years
slowness
the
Brazil,
Korea.
global
reduction
talked
ofofand
high
would
banks
toLatin
countries
was
ground.
in that
the
Latin
and
aof
for
3 Introduction
central
K.
D.C.,
Issues
summarise
the
The
in
shifted
countries,
time,
debt
international
split
bilateral
Professor
one
countries
official
held
collapse
protectionism,
obligations
Helleiner
were
cautious.
paper
management
In
Joshua
similar
4relief.
From:
FONDAD,
The
Jacob
Helleiner
World
another
Long
debt
ofowed
in
proposed
conference
1986.
the
into
just
HIPC
inFebruary
the
Greene
banks
A.
to
Nairobi
cautious
Greene
problem
Way
debate
Bank
debt.
inDebt,
the
(SIMICs).
discussion
to
debt;
Gerald
were
noted
Instead
Frenkel,
the
or
two
first
emphasised
systemsÓ.
book
Debt
commodity
that
(ed.),
to
official
main
and
SILICs,
financial
at
ofdebt
segments:
running
In
many
saw
IMF,
the
of
and
in
that
published
Relief
was
of
K.
experts
appeared
the
vein
2004,
the
IMF
his
ofsuggestions
the
1985,3
many
Africa
Michael
low-income
HIPC
In
problem
(ii)
Helleiner
countries
moderated
Washington
shifted
while
Nairobi
emphasising
IMFÕs
IMF.
parlance,
most
creditors
introduction
prices,
athe
1980s
the
-into
www.fondad.org
institutions
whole
obstacles
Initiative
(i)
debt
who
Myths
Helleiner
Òto
need
byThe
and
late
aof
research
P.the
of
serious
concentrated
from
debt
warned
whole
conference,
them
owed
of
high
in
exceed
range
byÐ1980s
proceedings
the
Dooley,
of
countries.
severely-indebted
for
andD.C.,
severely-indebted
Africa
the
IMF,
Helleiner
what
debt
donor
owed
in
International
being
to
international
range
Òimproved
Reality
atputting
problems
observed
department
of(IFIs).
University
prospective
need
1989.
and
IFIs,
the
Analytical
and
needs
owed
to
an
proposals
governments
were
infor
of
the
onPeter
donor
early
proceedings
were
and
Africa.
to
i.e.
debt
todebt
the
Official
with
that,
facing
IMF
domestic-debt
anycommercial
discussed
jointly
published
be
1990s,
governments,
of
stage
Monetary
Wickham
debt
lower-income
multilateral
interest
servicing
relief
paper
Issues
for
ofmiddle-income
the
done
Toronto
as
relief,
Atmultilateral
and
debt
these
problem
debt
that
servicing
aof
the
was
sponsored
to
result
measures
in
a(eds.),
servicing
in
byDebt,4
Fund,
banks
rates
proposals
resolve
debate
same
relief
was
African
conference
capacityÓ.
very
the
ai.e.
the
of,
debt.
ofand
IMF
IMF,
to
of
IMF,
Analytical
by Washington
acan
debtAfrican
Gerald
be
5 This
6Canada,
7NGOs
was
president
8debt
contributing
Jan
into
have
highly
of
HelleinerÕs
African
Culpeper
Canadian
In
Ômenu
option,
by
reduction
this
The
countries
relief
World
in
for
1980s.6
urgent
much
study,
(FONDAD,
provided
It
Crisis?
increasing
From:
FONDAD,
See
These
the
an
its
favour
was
attended
Joost
lack
European
engaged
relief
practice,
to
region
further
Roy
April
of
Bank
HIPC
study
unlikely,
leading
virtual
for
need
African
another
April
meetings
provide
countries
debt
Mistry
(FONDAD,
February
executive
optionsÕ
of
1991),7
toCulpeper,
Robert
Teunissen
and
derive
controlling
of
poor
expert
pressure
Debt
concern
the
1988
is
will
for
Africa
intheir
was
by
built
authors
reduction
official
and
than
1988.
the
donorsÓ.
absence.
insignificant
undertook
Debt
study
African
poor
the
North-South
countries
debt
Relief
resulted
the
McNamara
said
study,
from
of
Latin
Mistry
January
2004,
was
for
Percy
the
main
director
on
5The
necessary
about
respective
the
Revisited:
on
campaigning
key
African
to
relief
byprevious
Greene,
shared
the
these
debt
aterms
orMistry,
American
-western
www.fondad.org
Debt
and
this
obstacle
Culpeper
...
IMF
Mistry
stressed:
Ôtoo
adocument
1994),8
Myths
among
the
partial
debt
in
relief
number
Western
Institute,
at
The
and
institutions)
to
offered
Matrix,
the
countries.
volume.
by
in
Africa
little,
funding.
Ògiven
rising
work
the
creditors,
of
to
low-income
Procrastination
policymakers
and
others,
another
best
global
the
development
Multilateral
establishment
EURODAD.
being
observed:
that
offered
debt
low-income
present
at
of
ÒDebt
World
Reality
parliamentarians
done
World
prompted
in
aThe
the
debt
examples
meetings
studies
too
contributed
conference
that
Such
who
forgiveness,
terms.Ó5
Paris
resulting
Canadian
relief
North-South
by
present
Bank
lateÕ
problems
in
Bank
to
compelling
countries
was
ÒDespite
Matthew
bilateral
funding
NGOs
to
individual
early
Africa.
consider
former
that
Club
Debt:
from
of
that
ofin
advisor
(and
or
...
basis.Ó
consider
budgetary
economist,
the
the
in
showed
deals.
Progress?,
to
ofthat
1983
1988
FONDAD
is
AnMartin,
would
was
high-level
the
Institute,
Abidjan
aand
scope
The
arguments
putting
European
donors
poor
multilateral
still
Emerging
11-point
totoIn
growing
debtor
one
still
rich
late
substantial
former
debt
the
would
befor
the
organised
positions
1986.
one
Roy
obvious
his
being
inof
would
conspicuous
network
debt
goOttawa,
July
World
action
of
pathbreaking
the1991
debtBank
of that
plan on
years
World
1995)
Resolve
In
create
debt
Bank
exit
Club
later,
insufficient,
in
policymakers
its
Criticisms
The
summarised
First,
sustainability,
countries.
advocates
the
attainment
after
Second,
have
Florence
this
percent
HIPC
6Third,
From:
FONDAD,
Introduction
April
June
implementation
key
effectiveness.
criticisms
Initiative,
debt
relief
problem.
relief.
launched
from
and
proved
book,
Initiative.
before
Bank
to
HIPC,Ó
HIPC
aFebruary
in
since
the
the
1996,
objective
growth
higher(!)
come
1996,
Multilateral
bring
relief
Kuteesa
the
1999,
that
asked
as
In
of
the
current
Debt
for
Debt
toAnd,
in
the
observes
updebt-to-exports
repeated
the
follows.
Chapter
genuine
the
their
of
debt
assumptions
be
poor
when
both
private
rather
is
Relief
Development
the
with
Problems
Initiative
and
2004,
framework
finally,
of
remained
HIPC
the
unrealistic.
than
staff
fully
requirement
sustainability
countries.
staff
the
external
it
HIPC
Rosetti
proposals
Trust
2HIPC
debt
Martin.
Initiative.
debt
Initiative
than
-before
www.fondad.org
became
investors
of
presented
Initiative
granted.
Myths
ofand
and
ofsomething
in
slow,
Initiative
this
sustainability
was
Fund
reschedulings
has
Committee
the
Nabbumba
the
September
debts
donor
Uganda
clear
projections
Uganda
ratio
to
and
But
for
followed
not
book,
Heavily
for
instigating
Fund
was
remain
Such
spend
ÒAresulted
would
Reality
itobtained
dealing
was
to
countries
the
that
of
Framework
enhanced.
are
Matthew
one
is
observe
would
of
and
asustainable
1996,
to
Uganda
all
Indebted
by
financing
reluctant
become
awishful
ofclear
the
manifold
hopes
tothe
provide
of
awith
savings
still
HIPCs
observers
in
initiatives
IMF
proposal
the
original
to
Martin
future
in
debt
Bank
was
for
However,
long-term
an
would
the
review
policy
example.
Chapter
and
Poor
IMF
take
aof
levels.
and
to
intrinsic
in
relief
(October
Action
from
multilateral
permanent
strongly
debt
multilateral
and
the
invest
happen
June
CountriesÓ.
to
framework
and
can
almost
critically
Òleaves
progress
3beyond
debt
the
Paris
debt
levels
As
under
toafter
Three
be
of
2003
inWorld
goal
two
HIPC
and
fifty
the
years
was
of
Janan
service
countries
Fourth,
slow,
decision
Martin
contribution
for
committed
Maruping
inadequateÓ
in
Fifth,
Sixth,
against
and
As
Uganda
the
Seventh,
sustainability.
financing
large
fund
adds
debate:
western
relief,
implementation
amounts
credits
as
2002.
much
Eighth,
Millennium
that
From:
FONDAD,
Eastern
Florence
Joost
the
completion
hard
thus
three
relief
another
less
the
asexperienced
amounts
all-time
However,
HIPC
Gilman
the
solely
Initiative,
exogenous
large
companies!
Dijkstra
of
exploded.
the
February
point
stresses
hit
failed
the
key
Teunissen
as
by
years
for
money
and
eligibility
Initiative
debt
Development
Debt
implementation
in
Kuteesa
by
Initiative
highly
limited
to
the
by
Initiative
interesting
question
and
development
of
amounts
onRelief
for
point
delivering
Southern
multilateral
of
high
inthis
high
to
Again,
it
relief
became
international
aid
reports
2004,
social
Wayne
that
shocks
the
This
practice
actual
aaddress
received
In
7are
inflexible.
until
and
ofnumber
book
and
debts
fall
has
of
an
Enhanced
here
the
criteria
star
destined
led
debt
available
is
-Goals
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
Africa
Rosetti
has
expenditures
have
such
being
and
aid
evaluation
that
Myths
implementation
(Chapter
now
urgently
done
Ðof
not
ofrelief
HIPC
as
the
to
it
isof(MDGs).
HIPC
debt
provided
if
institutions.
28whether
alarming
are
(December
thus
the
as
during
what
meant,
linked
countries
community.
very
impact
at
diverted
HIPC
and
process
exclude
Nabbumba
percent
to
ofall.
the
country
relief,
being
for
Initiative
selected
5),
received
required
repayment
innocent
granted
Reality
the
little
study
Initiative
volatility
very
the
as
regular
to
Matthew
isused
of
element
debt
ofthe
AsIMF
2003)
has
countries
in
from
Dijkstra
seen
that
of
these
Uganda
report
which
years
the
little
Matthew
In
of
group
to
export
by
relief
report
the
been
debt
to
observers
funding
has
bilateral
Chapter
the
of
aidÓ.
Martin
bybegan,
have
38
only
protect
to
the
shocks
undermined
repay
2000-2002,
debt
is
in
Dutch
most
been
countries
Òslow
relief
of
additional
the
results
emphasises,
that
earnings
Martin
Netherlands
is
reached
in
10
acommodity
Chapter
HIPCs.
of
argues
relief
4,
good
7,
additionality
loans
freeing
ofthe
(extremely)
their
have
countries
on
the
export
might
and
are
budgets
indicates.
Mothae
to
Geske
the
debt
shows,
ofexample.
its
when
the
eligible
reached
countries
as
3,
during
due
debt
applaud
debtor
prices,
Òthat
funds
poor
debt
Dijkstra
in
to for
As
government
many
HIPC
not
Chapter
goals
rich
average
2005.
in
growth
launch
the
suitable
Ninth,
MDGs.
According
conditions
social
does
Òdouble
loans,
loans;
because
believe
What
performance.
The
debt
achieve.
urged
poor
Bank)
moderate
redefinition
developing
8In
From:
FONDAD,
Introduction
net
the
maximise
first
answer
HIPCs
programmes,
countries
not
Needs
problem
of
But
Geske
for
and
HIPC
transfers
of
HIPC
projects
and
(iii)
following
6,
debt
tyingÓ
governments
in
February
the
terms
free
Protestors
tone,
on
the
priority.
to
putting
for
spending
do
Amar
accelerate
for
then
while
to
countries.
Debt
conditionality
Dijkstra
its
HIPC
servicing
average,
her,
the
of
not
[HIPC]
resources
Be
the
aof
give
and
debt
(or
have
Bhattacharya,
from
new
poor
total
the
Relief
and
potential
if
setting
the
Done?
chapters,
2004,
include
Initiative
there
aid
question
an
form
even
enough
they
Looking
relief:
conditions
will
on
advocated
roles
that
Initiative,
comes
their
donors
countries
end
HIPCs
progress
since
cancellation
poverty
burden
the
-for
www.fondad.org
that
are
the
are
of
not
to
Myths
achievement
the
ofcontribution
aid.
impedes
out
tax
of
streets
this
will
ahead,
three
(i)
such
conditions
seldom
IMF
outright
and
to
will
carry
the
current
of
to
what
more
reduction.
towards
strongest
income
are
depends
and
ÒThe
lay
HIPCs
and
book
the
less
need
debt
expenditures;
IMF
beof
arguments
it
the
posed
out
impose
needs
effective
Reality
the
World
World
MDGs
HIPC
the
abolition
and
provides
of
design
than
10
and
will
are
while
Seattle,
debt.
the
attainment
are
to
policies
ontoto
foundations
the
percent
key,Ó
against
His
can
Initiative
debt
forced
aid
real
what
Bank
poverty
2Bank,
MDGs
be
first
against
in
the
be
Others,
MDGs
of
percent
debt
World
conclusion
only
additional
in
aGenova
service
stresses
many
(ii)
sanctions
done
one
ÒinterferenceÓ
of
HIPC
...
relief
that
wide
argues
of
conditionality.
to
set
general
in
of
the
relief
reduction.
be
wishes
Bank
GDP
for
Before
setting
spend
cases
it
to
in
their
relief
will
of
the
for
they
range
met
or
Fund
reduction
implies
on
resolve
aBhattacharya.
that
GDP
or
sustained
in
is
financing
the
has
on
Canc
more
and
ifthe
reduce
more
debt
these
do
tomore
and
of
that
does
by
lack
the
original
little
not
aIn
in
nthe
onsame
relief
have
theineffect
was
of
Janthe
suggestions
under
hindrance
macroeconomic
such
abandoned.
other
conditions
conditionality
Strategy
suggest
others
HIPC
debt
acknowledge
with
argue
domestic
Initiative
which
attention
sustainability.
bailing-out
given
that
to
facility
The
At
hastened
From:
FONDAD,
guarantee
poor
Joost
speed
depth
time-horizon
Future
conditionality
scheme
sustainability,
the
three
hand,
that
countries
in
HIPC
claim
August
eliminating
countries,
it
February
Paper
stated
debt
the
IMF
(PRGF)
toTeunissen
of
to
or
should
set
The
applied
additional
is
of
was
Debt
ofshould
broad
oppose
has
in
the
blame
providing
quicker
future
the
profoundness
form
conditionality.
and
too
HIPC
2002
what
for
IMF,
of
(PRSP).
Chapter
remarkable
fallen
objective
enter
It
multilaterals
should
Relief
need
of
be
2004,
categories:
reaching
private
limited.
of
themselves
the
this
by
is
implying
Debt
workshop
9grants
needs
should
the
debt
focused
completely
debt
as
the
to
debt
and
suggested
debt
implementation
Here
short
5.
-be
www.fondad.org
World
view
PRSP
Martin
Relief
sustainability.
stick
relief
Myths
toInstead
relief
IMF,
This
of
debt
complete
abolished
how
either
agreement
relief
relief
the
rather
that
on
bemany
and
as
debt
of
the
for
(i)
Therefore,
Bank
(see
there
to
Gilman
is
should
the
withdraw
HIPC
and
done.
astory
what
in
that
seems
argue
Initiative.
the
speed;
be
condition
its
relief
awkward
is
isDebt
and
the
longer-term
Chapter
than
of
Reality
altogether.
minimal
is
on
would
needed
bilateral
poverty-reducing
lack
They
severely
of
is
adoption.
and
be
just
the
tofrom
the
that
context
debt
athe
loans.
(ii)
debt
many
In
the
granted
addressed
Relief
be7)
Poverty
Wayne
and
African
ofcan
rich
be
looking
conditionality
addition
more
for
and
reduction
the
or
same:
Therefore,
long-term
progress
depth;
relief.
experts
needed
in
and
beorganised
hampered
of
future
donors
Iteven
countries,
debt
Mitchell
that
traditional
specific
under
clear
summarised
Reduction
the
that
is
participants
some
as
at and
completely
relief
to
the
also
The
argue
well.
HIPC
the
scheme,
of
should
growth
inthe
contrast
aid
lending
byachieving
the
observers
achieve
many
(iii)
problems
debt
main
HIPC
period
suggested
by
the
on
is
should
that
traditional
while
IMF
observers
stop
the
needed
timehorizon.
inbe
of
debtIntroduction
African
equally
the
HIPCs
Just
creditors
relief.
happens.
successful
way,
exercise
power
influence
This
failures
have
facts
The
problem
10
From:
FONDAD,
other
end
poor
crucial
sustainability
as
they
book
diverging
that
than
and
HIPC
officials
remarkable
of
happened
The
will
February
And
influence
debtor
ofhand,
remain
make
creditor
presents
arguments
wequestion
in
the
Debt
following
the
just
be
donÕt
putting
workshop:
sure
middle-income
views,
tend
countries,
HIPC
solved.
Relief
during
reticent
2004,
take
asthat
over
aaction
and
even
that
tothey
happened
thorough
Initiative.
is,
chapters
conditions
-their
www.fondad.org
poverty
abe
the
ÒWe
apply
the
aim
however,
Myths
Dutch
in
(or
less
on
share
debt
economic
own
are
providing
IMF
debtor
to
before,
the
lack
analysis
toresolve
provide
and
reduction.
critical
Treasury
responsibility.
putting
crisis
to
and
Although
the
ourselves!Ó
other
how
ofcountries
Reality
the
the
policies
common
the
action)
quickly
substantial
useful
of
ofWorld
delivery
hand,
the
about
participant
so
creditors
the
ItHIPC
the
many
objective
isBank
insights
of
are
had
on
successes
contributing
and
their
1980s,
encouraging
Northern
conditions
of
the
debt
having
in
thoroughly
and
remain
debt
continue
policies.
exclaimed
poor
the
debt
the
of
problem.
prompt
into
and
relief.
even
1980s
providing
officials,
HIPC
nations.
issue.
authors
tothe
why
that
to
debt
less
Sothis
at
to Initthis
on
was
1 Published sources for this chapter are listed in the bibliography, but the mai
nsource
and
Austria,
work
capital Analysis
ofisflows.
Development
Canada,
my Capacity-Building
work
I am
Denmark,
with
Finance
most 44grateful
developing
Ireland,
International
Programme
toSweden,
countries,
colleagues
(funded
onSwitzerland
aidin
through
bythese
management
theand
the
Governments
programmes
the
HIPCUK),
and private
Debtfor
ofStrategy
and the in
their
and especially to the opinions of HIPC Finance Ministers represented through the
put,
largely
declarations
based.ofForthemore
HIPCdetails,
Ministerial
see www.dri.org.uk.
Forum (1999-2002), However,
on which thethis
viewspaper
expresse
is
din this chapter are entirely personal and do not represent those of the Programm
2eor
11
The
Matthew
In
Indebted
it
Initiative
Initiatives.
to
financing
fulfiled
HIPC
the
(PV)
delivered
From:
FONDAD,
Assessing
For
its
1996,
reinforced
halve
Key
Òdebt
IIHIPC
ofmore
donors.
Policy
Martin1
will
HIPCsÕ
February
the
Poor
world
this
the
for
overhangÓ,
to
detail,
(HIPC
Debt
international
In
provide
all
HIPC
Countries
this
Millennium
the
potential.
Debates
poverty
debt
particular,
Relief
II).
34
2004,
MDGs,2
see
Initiative:
initiative,
byit
countries
aThis
Martin
by
large
-$31
www.fondad.org
Debt
has
Development
and
Myths
2015,
community
chapter
billion
itamount
promised
Relief
assesses
(2002a).
which
transforming
looks
and
by Reality
assesses
comparing
for
Initiative
of
are
introduced
at
Goals
towhether
debt
28
thecountries.
reduce
currently
(MDGs),
ititthe
the
potential
relief.
(HIPC
into
the
thebelieved
achievements
with
Initiatives
which
Òpresent
Heavily
the
In
I).
other
When
role
terms
Enhanced
Inrelief
aimofvalueÓ
sources
to1999,
ofbe
debt
have
these
HIPC
is relief in
of
3 All of the data on relief in this paragraph are based on joint publications by
IMF
eligible
by
In
PV-terms.
debts),
equals
debt
framework,
relief.
percent
Yet
misunderstandings
international
successes,
fulfilled.
on
funding.
HIPC
surrounded
reality
1themselves
MDGs.
Debate
Proponents
which
time
thereby
sustainability
achieve
Judging
four
12
From:
FONDAD,
the
Key
40the
terms
developing
Assessing
and
relief
as
has
of
sets
percent.
allow
HIPC
47February
1:World
In
and
aHIPC
of
the
providing
this.
whether
for
of
Neither
the
percent
total
HIPC
of
will
total,
based
On
by
the
and
Myths
of
Debt
ÒliquidityÓ
by
their
it
completion
will
Initiative
potential
issues:
the
Bank
institutions
the
countries
other
HIPC
The
creditor
HIPC
their
Does/Does
to
thereafter.
add
failure
developing
Relief
Initiative,
on
of
and
HIPC
2004,
provide
of
HIPCs
debt
since
other,
amake
(2002c,
total
claim
$8the
the
these
initiatives.
Initiative,
basis
scheduled
ideas
Realities
Initiative:
billion
service
to
debt
-point
www.fondad.org
relief
governments,
will
has
its
assumptions
or
without
amount
NGOs
Not
that
way
Myths
$58
perspectives
achieve
for
2003a,
ahave
for
Opponents
country
been
inception.
sustainable
pre-HIPC
eventually
means
Provide
when
tobillion
and
relief
HIPCs
(the
debt
of
by
how
and
ofThis
made
providing
as
measure
surrounded
2003b,
PV
56
civil
much
full
The
ofto
perceived
HIPC
debt
Reality
flow
service.
that
beyond
relief
percent.3
exaggerated
Debt
is
ofdebt
of
imposing
chapter
Key
Ondebt
are
more
debt
maintain
relief
have
society
can
based
(i.e.
HIPC
is
and
of
relief
all
one
enough
Sustainability
HIPC
overhang
accurate:
sustainable
future
HIPC
and
by
if
help
relief
2003c).
Additional
their
its
by
claim
burdens;
side,
attempts
on
payable),
will
myths
additional
reinforced
Debates
over
$11
organisations
the
their
butit
claims
promises
to
objective
payments
debt
is
will
be
billion
creditors
HIPC
reach
33the
linked
and
the
delivered,
debt
does
$39.4
to
involves
years.
pledges
reduced
of
atbetypes
truth
governments
have
conditionality
and
present
the
its
criteria
least
not
reduced
on
to
ofbillion
and
dismiss
This
its
service
been
is
byatthe
of that
49the
debt
in
Matthew
to
and
Measuring
Three
debt
service
value
in
Until
burden
governments,
investors.
agencies
concept
creditors
(some
atherefore
now
However,
low-income
as
First,
they
pretend
PV
debtor
service.
Guyana
I,
Ministry
delivered
If
investors
it
revert
Second,
From:
FONDAD,
debtor
include
todayÕs
the
calculations,
they
ÐHIPC
the
often
stock
all
but
elements
(PV)
the
cancelling
HIPC
concepts.
Òdebt
no
country
would
to
Martin
Ðthresholds
of
that
failed
is
many
February
country
while
use
In
when
itDebt
the
early
to
providing
suggested
and
private
only
need
stock.
Ðinwould
of
money
They
PV
countries,
to
Debt
Guyana,
creditors
to
show
overhangÓ
the
reductions
receive
also
annual
debt
has
the
continue
13Relief
Burdens
are
PV
react
over
to1990s,
remain
judge
(see
They
debt
(even
nominal
the
2004,
measurement;
that
reflects
other
market
understand
Minister
be
question
to30
Ðusually
reduction
relief
that
where
amounts
future
investor
very
$636
educated
preferable
set
Martin,
were
debt
up-front,
it
stock
and
the
their
Ðif
years
-to
www.fondad.org
pernicious
ofamount
PV
is
the
actors
ÒstockÓ
Myths
tothe
this
differently
civil
million
use
suggested
easy
foreign
key
burdens.
over
stock
tried
debt
is
not
judge
payable
and
was
different
burden
PV
through
Johnson
community
PV
about
concepts
was
the
concessionality
validity
and
ofrather
other
several
an
assess
society
and
toservice
introduced
of
and
to
ofReality
way
debt
understand
and
not
most
accurate
effects.
abandon
Nevertheless,
of
debt.
burned
explain
its
for
on
service
(PV)
gradual
and
reducing
to
toof
domestic
ways
the
debt
sustainability.
owed
the
private
decades)
theoretically
and
believed
than
meaning
measuring
aggregated
were
reductions
judge
Aguilar,
While
debt
debtorÕs
down
the
how
debt;
to
of
measure
stock
burdens
civil
that
byand
are
debt
stock,
the
allow
providing
interest
of
relief
concept
PV
apayment
private
investors
creditors
part
and
were
equivalent
the
this
country;
(iii)
preferred
to
in
the
which
society
service
isdebt
2000,
based
viewpoint).
of
using
in
creditors
trained
calculate
the
Paris
press
of
calculated.
ofaltogether
valid
debt
under
would
what
debt
capacity;
burdens:
sector
rates
deters
the
for
1990s,
debt
equal
onreleases
and
PV
may
in
reduction.
(ii)
Club
owed
present
debt
concept.
is
by
stock
HIPC
Finance
be
to
its
Ðdetail).
the
rating
relief
wish
and
for
value
known
using
track
debt
the
It
by
(i)
cost
and
isthat
to to
TheAssessing
on
disbursements
percent,
credits
around
heavily
depriving
With
programme
of
As
attacked
dollars
insists
more
rates
(around
Which
If
all
has
countries
the
using
private
these
HIPCsÕ
Domestic
2000),
many
use
central
employees
service
14
From:
FONDAD,
the
new
millions
interest
we
IMF
worst
types
omitted
international
market-based
their
equitable
countries,
used
at
Debts
are
would
HIPC
interest
4loans,
own
even
(2003f)
from
than
of
on
2.5
sector
bank
is
February
after
percent.
the
those
debt
countries
by
adjustment
serious
Ðof
for
rise
debt
retaining
funds.
analyses,
higher
Debt
ofthe
rates
to
two
domestic
not
though
isOECD
it
reaching
World
debt
overdrafts,
internationally.
are
isaRelief
HIPC
dollars
among
3applying
Include
debt
taken
indicates
rate
should
in
relief
types
be
partly
dramatic
apercent).
instruments.
HIPC
2004,
linked
governments
So
tumbled
about
which
community
The
than
1999-2000,
Trade
important
huge
Treasury
IIinto
of
inwhich
the
Òtrack
PV
countries
debt
however,
decision
of
IMF
Initiative:
and
be
debt
of
at
wider
because
-external
www.fondad.org
for
on
making
are
burden
instead
PV
Center
debt
arrears
Myths
that
fall
debt
after
decision
and
(2003f)
account,
countries
IMF
investments
isfor
relief.
recordÓ
the
important
does
bills,
debt
(so-called
therefore
countries
which
private
reach
However,
the
This
calculations
actually
points
relief
debt
in
they
and
September
and
overhang
debt
not
most
to
2001-2003.
suggests
sustainability
most
The
PVsuppliers
point.
over
bonds
the
Reality
would
These
the
gained
sustainable,
different
are
could
wish
service
discount
in
without
to
sector
low-income
Key
byonly
HIPCs
when
burden
cost
discounted
seems
entering
Pentagon,
time
burgeoning
CIRR
2000-2001
measure,
sustainability.
and
currently
interest
11,
If
developing
to
HIPC
earn
hundreds
including
offor
less
Yet
of
the
to
debt
relieve
(see
stocks
just
rates),
less
any
2001,
conclusions.
and
ofrate
the
Debates
bymore
borrowing
freeze
the
international
we
analysis,
countries.
traditional
domestic
objective
countries
Ðit
Johnson,
now
government
investing
concessionality
much
of
rates
lost
inshould
be
when
of
need
largely
are
actual
HIPC
would
countries
these
domestic
awhich
low-income
beginning
than
around
millions
discount
more
burden,
hundreds
small
also
terrorists
to
HIPC
export
debt
bebecause
debts
but
20discount
are
justification.
with
include
the
debt
based
2.5
fluctuate.
far
analysis
and
in
HIPCs.
community
hints
ofloan
to Ð that
Matthew
PRGF
HIPCs,
falls
impossible
spending
reduced
(Cape
insisted
should
international
domestic
sector,
external
Another
especially
received
Guyana,
rapidly
projects
(IMF,
capital
Private
not
enhance
that
crises
reimburse
other
The
and
analysis.
publicly
debt
federated
private
the
country
ÒenclaveÓ
From:
FONDAD,
international
uncommon
recent
the
IMF
programmes
they
contracted
inin
ways
Verde,
2003f)
reasons
HIPC
assuming
examine
Martin
using
the
key
Mozambique,
growing
flows,
monitoring
World
sector
has
examination)
February
inflation
unless
that
debt
debt.
large
or
guaranteed
will
the
Until
states,
projects
tosuggested
of
those
debate
Debt
economic
burden
export/import
Ghana,
asserts
in
ensure
resources
doing
all
community
problems,
recipient
debts
(Baball,
Bank
15Relief
total
foreign
debt
stay
but
largely
optimistic
we
private
these
now,
by
which
2004,
community
debt
about
municipalities),
analyse
emerging
this
and
may
other
guaranteed
which
so,
Tanzania).
Tanzania,
stocks
sustainable
or
debt
adequate
(domestic
growth
that
the
might
countries.
that
sustainability
have
investment
analysis
foreign
2002;
-also
www.fondad.org
ignore
committed
using
should
since
sector
is
countries
debt
reduce
HIPC
in
public
earn
Myths
transactions.
most
rapid
and
not
of
some
be
insists
prospects
for
liberalised
run
debt
Martin,
sustainability
resources
programme
these
Tchad,
50
Initiative
by
excluded
enough
the
resolve
As
give
debt
low-income
so
exchange
and
domestic
low-income
aand
sector
of
clearance
to
So
sustainability
the
afor
(e.g.
(Martin
if
risk
domestic
external)
these
as
such
Reality
that
result,
high
are
to
100
there
not
Uganda
private
2002b).
government.
foreign
HIPC,
analyses
and
well
the
finance
of
institutions
because
for
aid
undermining
capital
ABolivia,
percent
produce
reserves
debt
debt
this
priority
debts
has
the
recent
countries
and
is
reducing
oflaunched
domestic
countries,
asdebt
poverty
but
or
HIPC
and
debt
an
sector
taken
(subject
exchange
domestic
interest
burden
sustainability
Rose-Innes,
debt
privatisation
and
foreign
in
it
there
accounts
Zambia)
of
urgent
foreign
analysis,
burden
Ministers
Gambia,
IMF
become
Recently,
burdens,
to
order
is
PRGF
export
the
into
contracted
reduction
debt
the
have
debtors
(parastatals,
cannot
solving
Board
by
to
are
toarrears,
rates.
investment
need
breadth
ofrepay
documents
private
is
to
exchange
short
the
account
finance
problem.
and
Ghana,
low
case-bycase
many
2003).
earnings
including
have
while
the
paper
ensure
however,
beprivate
to
fail
IMF
receipts
of
have
Itit.
for
byofall
orthe
isare
to
However,
concessionality
expensive,
commercial
parastatal
projected
then
foreign
treat
ÐTherefore,
Judging
framework.
There
of
budget
being
remains
Export
most
and
service.
inflationary
transform
external
This
offshore
export-earning
contribute
used
sector),
private
analyse
(breaking
or
risk
It
assessment
16
From:
FONDAD,
though
adoof
mega-companies
is
Assessing
the
country.
African
is
to
such
is
used
very
HIPC
revenue,
earnings
not
exchange
Payment
who
particularly
judge
sector
government,
foreign
February
excluding
asome
In
debt
accounts
because
foreign
private
down
less
lenders,
agencies
debt
HIPCs
lot
as
have
no
difficult
of
Debt
pays
addition,
governments
risks)
the
ofthe
Theoretically,
the
service
tax
total
payment
ofRelief
projects
debt.
ceilings
high-quality
as
Capacity
preferably
are
captive
exchange
market.
would
it
the
private
HIPC
2004,
exchange
confusion
measure
export
and
revenue
or
such
publicly
private
often
which
might
not
to
national
parastatal
debt
true
However,
projects)
tofalls
they
(or
used
capacity
Initiative:
rather
-buy
www.fondad.org
aloans
private
are
see
encouraged
Finally,
have
earnings
sector
shortage.
Myths
providing
therefore
need
of
service.
good
local
when
toearnings
expressed
may
foreign
to
sector
oncapacity
guaranteed
about
given
what
finance
one
the
government.
from
see
liberalised
repay
it
the
to
indicator
be
most
for
and
sector
currency
export
could
debt.
is
relevance
all
be
how
unable
into
long
where
The
past
government
exchange
private
their
low-income
Reality
irresponsible
continuing
failed
often
export
private
vital
byKey
treated
ininternational
such
to
debt
use
But
export
government
tax
earnings
IMF
export
present
necessary
judge
of
(or
to
Export
pay
fungibility,
fail
foreign
in
HIPC
tosector
debt
GDP/GNI,
the
earnings
holidays,
sector
GDP/GNI
programme
(see
payment
in
pay
outside
unwilling
debt
most
restructure.
or
earnings
countries,
credit
Òescape
to
fundamental
the
Debates
included
value
domestic
earnings
are
undermines
IMF,
lending
materialise,
exchange
forex
(public
African
export
into
payment
markets
debt;
has
institutions
exports
capacity,
are
available
the
soagencies
2003a).
terms
to
fundingÓ
given
sub-sectors
totoas
held
that
inany
HIPC
debt
or
can
earnings
assess
ofpay
pay
and
countries
Also,
capacity
issue
markets
to
the
analysis
or
if
when
there
into
they
besince
debt
service).
private
and
PVtopay
the
high
still
isto
Matthew
no
to
Payment
depends
risks
collection
relief.
revenue
programmes.
trust
HIPCs
of
Ratios
The
eligibility
and
Underwood,
among
allies
the
allows
Moreover,
than
(initially
250
by
keep
Several
2000;
examined
econometrically
criterion
However,
sustainable.
should
From:
FONDAD,
dÕIvoireÓ
at necessary
pay
payment
empirically
apercent.
amount
Bank
focus,
debt
down
level
aHIPC
the
are
G-7
Martin,
debt.
and
different
be
Martin
capacity
on
is
moral
However,
collection
studies
February
officials)
the
IMF
convinced
creditors,
G-7
service.
costs.
of
reduced
criterion
budget
subject
efforts
capacity
Thresholds
of
1989)
the
above
200-250
Debt
just
ItPolitical
thresholds
correlation
levels
150
PV/budget
Vaugeois
hazard
to
debt
officials
1999a;
17
should
desire
unjustified
(Cohen,
unsustainable.
Relief
low
for
this
monitor
and
all,
forms
percent
2004,
revenue.
to
towere
(or
and
relief
The
percent)
that
for
of
Ðbalancing
enough
government
that
then
Pattillo
155
manipulation
argument
be
to
on
(1999)
the
falsify
monitoring
which
of
PV/exports
compromises
debt
-revenue
www.fondad.org
government
regarded
2000;
between
easy
such
budget
based
keep
PV
in
percent.
Myths
they
under
modified
debt
PV/budget
It
sub-criteria
to
in
and
which
HIPC
(according
and
is
for
efforts
costs
Elbadawi
et
include
would
its
is
on
the
relief
They
criterion
and
external
revenue
HIPC
the
it
sometimes
debt
al.,
II
Martin
purely
is
the
initial
threshold
have
Johnson
by
reporting)
debt.
to
need
two
especially
Reality
and
down.
PV/budget
have
is
revenue
reduce
one
has
governments
international
and
suit
to
overhang
2002;
Cmain
et
proven
near
the
should
to
(1999a)
te
(or
theoretical
of
been
appear
found
avoid
analysis
These
al.,
(2000)
argued
public
political
include
exclude
dÕIvoire,
availability
their
the
criteria
was
and
sustainable
250
threshold
total)
in
determined
revenue
explain
historically
be
as
1997;
that
key
any
compromises
equal
set
Vaugeois,
percent
indicate
order
finds
that
and
budget
the
statements
more
(e.g.
strategic
other
debt
elements
community
moral
at
the
since
compromises
for
Johnson,
and
therefore
key
in
threshold
the
which
budget
to
of
150
that
PV/export
levels.
is
of
basically
revenue
by
Humphreys
debt
their
countries
that
accompanied
increase
hazard.
ameasure
ÒC
1999)
budget
percent
or
far
resources
explain
burden
the
was
of
by
G-7
te
to
relief;
itimpact.
from
IMF
Fund
at
have
setand
debtPV
4poverty
indicators
sustainability
Many have
reduction
compared
alsoshould
argued
(CAFOD
tobeeconomic
that
judged
et al.,
judging
indicators
by2003).
whether
debtThissustainability
ischapter
sufficient
too narrow,
returns
funding
byandratios
tois
that
that
released
ofissue
truedebtfor
under
proven
thresholds
PV/budget
The
service/exports
high
indicate
fact
the
poverty
Goals,
It
decliningÓ.
especially
leaving
set
bodies
debt
for
Summarising,
progress
not
rules
promise
sustainability
only
long
exports
initiatives
priority
free
18
From:
FONDAD,
Debates
aims
Assessing
dominance
key
at
judging
anti-poverty
take
service
level
that
relief.
service/budget
after
as
funding
which
HIPC
unsustainable
HIPC
around
as
4to
indicator
reduction
only
many
of
HIPC
ratio,
February
that
towards
notice
and
revenue
all
diverse
are
of
for
making
HIPC
Debt
IIthe
This
debt
virtually
beyond
reducing
ratios
HIPCs
Independent
analysis
for
5it
of
15-20
it
HIPCs
13
needed
continues
tailoring
indicators
below.
ratio
of
completion
Relief
G-7
ahas
leaves
percent
sustainability,
spending.
debt
poverty
HIPC
2004,
ratio
threshold
of
spending
as
debt
leaves
with
debt
and
were
percent
regard
revenue
atInitiative:
views
been
Oxfam
debt
for
was
Initiative
sustainability:
ignored
continues
sustainable,
-after
www.fondad.org
ofMyths
150
aservice/budget
high
sustainability,
given
to
Ðanalysis
the
reduction
external
treated
unsustainable
burden
large
and
service/revenue
total
in
the
ato
and
point
percent,
should
compared
avoid
ratio
profile
ratios
level
attainment
HIPC.4
the
reach
debtor
tailor
much
debt
the
and
leeway
to(external
if
in
makes
(see
discussions
as
systematic
has
of
The
debt.
be
near
US
focus
spending.
Reality
less
service/budget
the
in
order
it
HIPC
aimplying
to
of
10
needs.
analysis
reduced
found
Congress.
before
IMF/World
Key
secondary
revenue
for
the
some
is
independent
at
aim
Millennium
relief
the
percent
instead
ofHIPCs
prominence.
excessively
itself
togenuine
not
ratios
HIPC
plus
12
subjective
initial
isits
that
10
important
However,
attention
free
that
also
percent.
enough
to
believe
ratio
to
percent
Debates
domestic)
HIPCs
as
sticking
Bank,
should
150
criterion,
this
creation,
country
below
free
creditor
the
much
explains
revenue
Development
years
the
debt
studies
percent.
The
which
to
on
viewpoints,
ratio
advocate
maximum
2003a).
that
In
resources
to
endorsed
key
be
10
lower
live
broaden
the
sustainability
debt
of
to
circumstances
debt
spite
this
giving
percent,
ratio
is
preferences,
criterion
creditors
the
why
but
which
HIPC
should
debt
PV/
upAs
Òlow
funding
has
aratio.
attop
of
by
toasand
for
relief
a didto
the
and
be
its
to
Matthew
Debate
One
Burden
obliges
abilities
creditors
preferential
Preferential
participating.
Before
creditorÓ
was
sustainability,
disagreed
acknowledged
disastrous
status.
when
bilateral
convincing
have
funding
be
debt
Development
In
participating
contributions
gone
gold),
the
fund
multilateral
financial
states.
support
grants
From:
FONDAD,
too
addition,
oftheir
argued
IMF,
needed,
agreed
owed
further
HIPC
2:February
the
high.
provisions
(see
Martin
them
ÐThey
Instead,
part
World
HIPC
(though
status
with
and
except
to
credibility
main
HIPC
that
effects,
argument
own
Debt
they
Coalition
Debate
toto
provide
treatment
Treatment
that
only
provided
Some
them
even
than
and
ofcommercial
in
19Relief
Does/Does
this
Bank
relief
claims
share
Initiative,
although
this
asand
can
to
relief,
HIPC
sub-regional
bilateral
2004,
it4and
they
share
have
without
to
before,
abelow
assessment.
but
for
say
does
relief).
was
provide
the
relief,
the
result
after
Ireland,
from
Ðreflows
or
for
to
could
-argued
www.fondad.org
they
the
keeping
that
Inter-American
and
Not
essential
many
creditors.
degree
they
future
Myths
burden
not
some
any
there
HIPC
their
donors
and
multilateral
burden
the
even
Make
of
provide
retained
relief
the
reducing
have
Yet
(Mistry,
that
damage
are
which
organisations
creditors
2003).
also
and
isthe
which
With
67
this
that
remain
lending
ofare
cost
own
All
its
not
that
the
to
of
percent
they
Reality
debt
However,
without
could
Chapter
the
some
status
(notably
multilateral
resources.
relief
Creditors
critics
they
their
Òslightly
additional
of
making
having
availability
ability
1994;
reserves
Development
itrelieving
could
torelief
and
creditors
launching
debt
be
includes
did
debt
HIPCs
financial
once
damaging
7Ðto
many
UNCTAD,
nobody
the
used,
toclaim
easily
Debt
without
of
todivert
not
relief
beShare
to
less
reduction
While
(including
debt
the
maximum
or
this
mandate
others
institutions
provided
the
had
provide
all
and
notably
Bank,
of
all
that
has
other
1993)
preferred
multilaterals
their
cancel
the
health
HIPC
without
relief
they
damaging
direct
volume).
limits
Òpreferred
of
grant
creditors
made
itmember
are
possible
toorby
from
the
debt
it
own
have
IMF
those
gives
all
force
not
and
athat
funding
bilateral
oftheir
was
debt
other
creditorÓ
are
relief.
of
their
ofand
is,
would
theto It
Non-Participating
Many
agreements
Thirty-two
participate.
of
notice
sanctions;
countries
countries;
creditors
willingness
materialising
relieving
relief
HIPCs
worrying
(usually
times
legal
million
The
has
insufficient,
and
debt
few
interest
PV
Ethiopia,
Zambia)
amounts
point
there
All
HIPC
between
20
From:
FONDAD,
the
reduction).
Assessing
commercial
Paris
agreed
most
creditors
major
creditors
is
where
Initiative
owe
this
fees,
was
were
HIPC
Bretton
of
agreement
small,
in
have
were
decision
February
recent
successfully)
Club
in
their
(largely
(e.g.
only
$2
Club
Gambia,
short,
multilateral
by
non-Paris
middle-income
and
aamount
that,
necessary
delays
Debt
toyear,
forcing
Paris
These
billion
not
small,
the
participating
as
it
members
are
oftrend
Woods
other
participate.
aid
creditors
judgements
has
Also,
decisions
India,
and
Relief
actual
yet).
for
will
received
there
and
HIPC
2004,
Creditors
HIPCs
to
charging
Club
Guyana,
in
fall
China
debt
undermining
made
some
the
Club
institutions
HIPCs.
in
creditors,
many
ato
creditor
completion
has
cancel
have
Initiative:
Libya)
for
bilateral
considerable
was
-creditors
www.fondad.org
are
into
debt
and
PV
major
attain
period
Arab
and
refusing
debtors
have
Myths
creditor
because
been
in
HIPCs
Nicaragua,
relief
terms
full
gone
excessive
anfully
In
However,
not
5steps
India);
relief
international
upor
have
administrative
discussions
agreed
categories:
the
of
poverty
sustainability
between
and
fulfilling
export
recovery
due
where
to
further
points.
North
to
agreements
immediately
have
in
(BWI)
they
some
to
The
governments
last
indicated
100
Reality
for
commercial
to
pay
forward
number
the
former
these
participate
Sinterest
to
Cologne
agreed
Key
opercent
are
African
credits;
non-Paris
accumulation
reduction
decision
or
18
countries
amounts
to
provide
However,
Tom
debt
ofor
HIPC
the
creditors
take
under
months
statements
courts
cancel
of
Eastern
debt.
under
(failing
in
under
backlog
PRGFs.
to
,HIPCs
reduction.
terms
thresholds.
rates,
terms
are
countries;
creditors.
of
Debates
Uganda
little
principle
Libya
as
and
participate
interim
international
Club
and
spending
seven
some
(e.g.
Though
have
HIPC
pre-cutoff
post-cutoff
refusing
large
HIPC,
European
of
will
(Bolivia,
completion
of
which
suing
fees
to
inhave
had
governments
and
of
awarded
interest
II.
regional
HIPC
India
provide
the
relief
the
as
be
because
Asian
these
their
Anot
plans.
However,
or
are
not
debtors
Itto
$50
Club,
in
original
date
penalty
has
signed
date
nonmembers
3been
the
and
agreed
todebt,
been
or
a4a
Matthew
debt)
At
(representing
community
themselves
number
if
sustainable
In
international
undermining
progress
appropriate
issue,
have
to
BWIs
and
cover
Ministers
¥of
HIPCs
the
Unequal
Some
The
OECD
PV
percent
From:
FONDAD,
Establish
Publish
Widen
Create
acancellations
non-participation
the
2001-2003,
discourage
take
this
relief,
sub-regional
margin,
civil
Paris
global
argued
are
creditors
governments
have
are
such
(and
HIPC
ofFebruary
first
there
Martin
sides
the
process
Burden
(ranging
inClub).
anow
toDebt
countries
the
also
society
have
not
estimate
creditors.
separate
to
and
level,
it
if
sustainability
aresolving
independent
that
use
ignore
nine
has
publishing
10-15
partly
community
rapid
or
in
details
other
21Relief
yet
is
deadlock
publishing
recently
Sharing
are
toof2004,
(HIPC
institutions
deal
been
they
legal
were
from
anow
countries
to
of
bring
agreed
non-participation
the
percent
the
critical
at
which
response
Trust
countries
is1supposed
due
change
100the
with
no
cannot
of
This
Ministerial
22percent
disputes.
IDA
-formally
www.fondad.org
problem.
taken
with
has
institution.
these
expressed
down
toFund
progress.
creditors
percent
Myths
tois
(eight
will
problem.
such
for
creditor
commercial
ofPV/export
to
dialogue
realised
such
participate
factor
various
legal
run
(representing
into
annually
currently
which
total
be
reach
many
details
for
to
and
sharing
to
Yet,
more
such
creditorsÕ
ofunsustainable
their
Network
provide
account.
HIPCs
assistance
The
that
clearing
41
Reality
inIn
HIPCs.
litigation,
have
debt
was
debt),
completion
creditors
with
non-participation
for
athan
debt
percent
debt
Bretton
in
and
ratios
spite
facility
refuse
being
impatience
more
ina2003b);
long
have
debt
announced
individual
HIPCs,
BWI
the
Yet
working
reduction
1.4
HIPC.
leading
sustainability.
They
minds;
HIPC
further
burden
seen
urged
facility
of
Board
studied,
cancellation
by
for
BWIs)
continues.
it
Woods
topercent
at
point
run
also
the
without
debts
anhas
provide
individual
asaverage
completion
with
at
bythe
it
by
Papers.
than
$5
HIPCs,
the
urgency
institutions
facility
insignificant
indicate
cannot
made
the
various
isBWIs
to:
an
and
to
billion
ofothers.
international
true
appearing
seriously
help
relief.
slowness
other
total
little
HIPC
from
and
HIPCs
extra
beto
of
HIPCs).
point
that
HIPCs
ofatHIPC
this
Thesix
21
However,
funds
discussion,
abandoned.
intended
ensure
are
not
UK
debt
post-cutoff
cancellation
provide
reduction.
cancellations
reduce
creditors
Summarising,
genuine.
obliging
non-OECD
Ðmost
credibility
and
themselves.
sustainability,
against
Debate
Severe,
Shocks
(unexpected
undermine
negatively
(exports
expanding
22
From:
FONDAD,
but
and
Assessing
Òfree
comparable
cancellations
some
from
are
to3:
those
HIPC
that
the
their
noand
lawsuits.
lengthy
February
they
finance
extra
most
providing
which
ridingÓ
the
to
HIPC
economic
debt
fiscal
Therefore,
US
additional
HIPCs
directly
Debt
this
HIPCs
date
which
of
If
factors
increditors
burdens
share
some
budget
the
decision
are
relief
in
are
the
Does/Does
sustainability
ways
it
and
Relief
the
Òsafety
debt,
therefore
and
HIPC
2004,
not
reach
on
their
at
genuinely
treated
commercial
are
athe
Initiative
participating
international
will
prospects)
frequent
beyond
on
revenue)
overall
the
all.
(via
below
large
balance
being
in
provided
budget
Initiative
not
Initiative:
point.
or
burden;
-the
www.fondad.org
the
coverage
to
need
marginÓ
calculating
extra
Not
Myths
Only
ODA
debt
as
participating
urge
HIPC
provide
amount
the
denominators
allowed
HIPC
cancelling
HIPC
savings
genuinely
creditors
to
Protect
so-called
and
of
Other
debt.
and
are
for
bypayments
relief.
Australia,
conversions
control
and
creditors
thresholds
introduce
ofThe
thresholds,
or
has
could
community
indirectly
relief:
some
and
adenying
almost
that
relief.
Reality
toAgainst
21
timing
G-7
Others
crucial
the
for
made
participating
Key
percent
creditors
In
100
additional,
provided
do
Òexogenous
ofgovernments
all
risk
of
sharing
spending
all
financing
so,
without
addition,
Canada,
to
major
HIPCsÕ
more
measures
the
HIPC
percent
Ðare
and
Before
is
debt
ÒcancellationsÓ
factor
onand
France
ensure
undermining
Exogenous
HIPCs.
due
serious
government
has
implementing
forcing
to
the
Debates
progress
no
sustainability
ofshocksÓ
is
other
in
debt
togaps,
much
Italy,
on
HIPC,
share
simply
of
allowing
relief.
to
which
numerators
being
the
some
are
and
that
in
They
shortage
poverty
all
sustainability
about
protect
public
creditors
all
the
burden,
cancellations
excluding
Italy)
multilateral,
the
cases
Norway,
100
in
the
which
regularly
impact
thus
been
used
bilateral
Now
Initiative
them
are
burden
debt
percent
ofratios
countries
bytothe
are
which
the Ðare
to
Matthew
inducing
and
exogenous
modifications
wrongly
First,
for
medium-term
practice
means
multi-year
revenue
based
take
Second,
of
Òtopping
immediately,
HIPCs
limiting
changes
Burkina
also
sustainability
Faso
ratios
provides
The
the
points,
own
adjusted
As
only
post-completion
HIPC
However,
From:
FONDAD,
acompletion
Alami,
HIPC
export
economy.
flexibility
impact
debt
much
had
has
result,
at
II
reflect
on
analysed
HIPC
HIPC
for
Martin
to
ratio,
HIPC
in
Faso
or
one
is
February
Initiative
into
the
upÓ
topping
unsustainable
qualified,
little
sustainability
to
more
shocks,
account
2001;
assume
volatility,
average
ameasurement
the
of
after
largely
Debt
introduced
export
offset
snapshot
most
II
If
(more
worries
countryÕs
has
the
borrowing
aof
export
point,
exogenous
fundamentally,
23Relief
or
were
only
next
fixed
agreed
prospects
hope
of
point
IMF,
the
up
received
completion
Initiative
2004,
even
that
to
recent
of
which
trends.
debt
the
ignoring
was
believed
to
at
but
16
Initiative
volatility
the
recent
to
about
of
date.
2003c;
3-year
shocks
though
it
at
allowing
does
to
countries
economic
ratios).
the
years
HIPC
-negative
www.fondad.org
byMyths
never
take
relief)
will
real
shocks
analysis
would
debt
year
amight.
reassess
had
topping
countries
Somehow
cost
moment
Bolivia
relatively
not
volatility
Initiative
point.
is
shocks.
and,
average
account
to
nevertheless
due
long-term
making
the
intended
certain
service/export
only.
changed
show
between
effectively
and
led
exports
in
apply
to
implications
need
circumstancesÓ.
In
economic
Two
where
to
at
Initiative
World
up
of
this
all
debt
the
addition,
While
and
Reality
acountries
So
future
these
debt
tonegatively,
policies
of
topping
(though
the
public
more
either
tointerim
early
HIPCs.
HIPC
of
HIPC.
shocks
debt
was
decision
Uganda
fill
Bank,
to
was
exports,
sustainability
completion
many
impact
highly
protect
exports
have
times,
beis
true
borrowing.
never
providing
transformed
relief
sustainability.
the
statements
stage
to
ratio,
But
(given
up)
Benin
topping
2003c).
and
led
presented
In
Òlead
HIPCs
have
unsustainable
not
picture
the
exogenous
As
and
of
unsustainable.
gaps
which
addition,
almost
led
intended
debt
HIPCs
civil
to
or
it
some
adoes
and
exogenous
both
surrounded
PV/budget
both
that
to
point.
completion
conduct
this
budget
was
to
result,
up
debt
(see
Topping
relief
does
at
fundamental
Mauritania
against
and
societies
allowance
on
of
in
not
restrictions
aims
suffered
ofsustainability
to
14assumption.
the
shocks
to
Martin
the
Burkina
not
which
really
revenue.
grant
of
their
only
to
debt
cover
is
shocks.
time
up
by
basis
use
24
Sobytoare
reach
not anyof a
of
a comprehensive
HIPCs
economic
accompany
potential
BWIs
analysts.
commodities
predictable
Malawi
document
shocks
leads
gapsÓ,
Moreover,
payments
their
largely
HIV-AIDs
in
exports
have
Until
were
other
for
asking
and
providing
programme
fill
responses
key
not
facilities
countries),
virtually
24
From:
FONDAD,
recent
the
Assessing
the
low-income
projections
anti-poverty
included
often
taken
woefully
gaps
against
to
impact
recently,
large
HIPC
and
are
future
worst-affected
countries
ignore
World
by
February
prospects
projections
systematic
impact
pandemic
HIPC
ÒshocksÓ
projections
Yet
decades,
PRGF
additional
loans
remaining
have
never
argue
Niger).
really
eliminating
this
such
Debt
isthe
where
economies
and
oninadequate,
accessing
exogenous
shocks
borrowing
Bank
relief,
now
programmes
another
countries.
usually
international
of
the
into
responses
downwards
and
as
EU
disbursing).
Relief
that
to
expenditure
HIPC
2004,
they
Ònon-shocksÓ
on
inafter
ato
beyond
In
ÒshocksÓ,
indicate
those
STABEX
underestimates
budget,
adjust
grants
ofInitiative:
secular
are
growth
account.
disbursements
the
aid
such
are
this
countries,
while
continue
occur
key
skilled
proven
-international
www.fondad.org
shocks.
similar
and
systematically
of
Myths
PRGF
flows,
no
doubt,
focus
focused
The
to
additional
(which
shocks
light,
Ònon-shockÓ
their
to
debt
GDP
and
growth
ignoring
the
more
decline
with
while
shocks
match
from
Nor
financial
responses
compensate
too
programmes
(i.e.
labour.
and
Inhave
to
magnitudes
excessively
growth
debt
IMF
commodity
and
burden
sharply
economic
was
cannot
optimistic
regular
BWI
on
little
drastic
The
particular,
take
failing
could
the
of
Reality
bynotorious
(which
orKey
climatic
should
sustainability.
emerging
any
ÒadjustmentÓ.
contingency
programme
balance
multilateral
they
Ðorhave
Yet
the
shocks,
architecture
far
stagnation
overoptimistic,
(see
beHIPC
the
fall
reducing
well-structured
for
and
ofdistinguished
frequency
poverty.
programmes
cuts.
prices
have
to
only
international
are
too
foreseen
have
onthe
than
also
potential
consisted
part
way
shocks
of
analyse
by
market
projections
the
and
too
for
Debates
little
happened
and
three
In
IMF,
been
payments
2.5
too
and
and
those
Serieux,
budget
of
inHIPC
balance
They
(secondarily)
and
In
general,
expensive
(for
tothe
or
are
UNAIDS
percent
and
the
late
compensatory
which
climate.
foreseen).
sufficiently
HIPC
account
impact
of
bilateral
protect
that
of
and
also
many
example
revenue
community
mechanism
shocks
between
prices
Òfinancing
(predominantly)
past
to
other
2002).
of
analyses
many
they
athe
protect
for
times
of
ofand
The
year
these
of most
in
This
the
and
have
lowincome
Matthew
permanent
adjust,
However,
context
ÒadjustmentÓ
financing,
spending
the
that
compensated
Recent
analysisÓ
measures
lending
price
HIPCs
They
programmes,
countries
disasters
volatility
aid
review
them
poverty
paper
financing
growth
which
Subsequently,
ÒrealisticÓ,
¥discussion
vulnerability
of
From:
FONDAD,
Analysis
All
Baseline
BWI
the
MDGs).
shortfalls
ofHIPC
suggest
are
shocks.
see
Ôlikely
baseline
this
would
BWI
projections
of
might
World
Martin
and
of
the
in
reduction
February
this
(some
beyond
to
taken
shocks,
in
these
with
(e.g.
each
tothe
or
In
papers
local
of
year
with
scenarios
Debt
temporary
HIPC
while
protect
including
not
byto
programmes.
that:
attain
project
leading
Bank
system
decisions
addition,
shocksÕ
commodity
shocks
many
25Relief
Millenium
of
prevalence
compared
IMF
very
scenarios
an2004,
debt
measures
droughts
suggested
reach
donors
Initiative,
currency,
shocks,
toAfrican
which
temporary
argue
goals)
Task
and
programme,
African
rapidly.
MDGs
which
of
relief,
Òalternative
to
should
shocks,
must
the
conducting
or
-Force
www.fondad.org
responding
will
this
that
prices
to
abandonment
Development
They
as
must
for
or
e.g.
Myths
impact
of
that
MDGs,
civil
aalso
country
or
be
projections.
countries
shocks
governments
inadequate
floods
be
were
country
need
attitude
in
shocks
5such
all
on
which
have
measures
in
to
attain
implementing
percent;
over
conducted
countries
and
which
as
society.
Commodity
baseline
of
ensure
African
projecting
contain
toReality
as
Òstress
realistic
toof
due
are
also
twice
the
could
are
can
HIV/AIDs
the
should
Goals.
be
reducing
the
faced
shocks
is
permanent
not!
to
basis
the
ÒpermanentÓ,
cut
be
suggested
against
regular
last
that
completely
in
MDGs
countries.
which
realistic
require
inadequate
testsÓ
hedge
reach
scenarios
Risk
overcome
IMF
MDGs,
the
befor
Every
afrom
every
over-optimistic
baselineÓ
cannot
on
10
measures
the
decade);
(and
expected
could
pressure
recommendations
Management,
shocks
shocks,
against
the
poverty
or
years;
spending
or
PRGFs.
without
external
dollar
Òover-optimismÓ
several
semi-annual
frequent
other
measures
work
inconsistent
largely
Òsensitivity
MDGs.
Aof
orscenarios
is
not
toand,
Fund
are
BWI
average
largely
ainaccessible
such
commodity
for
to
inpiecemeal
of
offset
national
mobilise
dollar
to
financing.
Board
bethe
by
average
to
reach
as reduce
towith
less
focusing
products,
MDGs,
explicit
¥financing
contingency
possible
mobilising
tranches
IMF,
Summarising,
immediately.
countries
community
low-income
wider
the
Debate
Proponents
Development
additional
outside
been
HIPC
development
pressure
contribution
(notably
(AfDB
IDA),
could
certainly
in
However,
relief
institutions
26
From:
FONDAD,
All
IMF
which
Assessing
MDGs.
WBHIPC
additional
debt
regardless
PRGF
measures
and
increase
4:February
isand
the
PRSPs
discussions
additional
of
to
the
Òone
there
and
against
to
HIPC
relief
EU),
especially
not,
not
alternative
Board
up-front
countries.
of
financing
Debt
measures
donor
other
ÐBretton
relieve
accelerate
focus
to
UK
are
the
opening
HIPC
notably
dollar
sufficiently
onRelief
are
Does/Does
to
annual
as
is(or
increasing
and
ofsome
Papers
has
not
HIPC
2004,
export
funding
donorsÕ
exogenous
providing
more
needed
have
the
necessary
pledges
Woods
additional
debt
Ireland),
ofInitiative:
for
freed
to
more
providing
OECD
Initiative
Improvements
via
aid
scenarios
feared
-reason
www.fondad.org
scale
the
poverty
should
protect
closely
generally
pledges
diversification
Not
development,
and
Myths
which
budget
to
institutions
IMF
flows
debt
markets
aid
additional
need
by
shocks,
aid
stop
Supply
fund
ofand
external
gold
at
toinclude
donors,
enough).
budgets
relief
enough
reduction.
against
can
on
as
at
by
should
less
for
support)
has
accelerating
the
worry
shocks
argued
poverty
The
for
their
in
sales.
grants
the
$16
Reality
bebeginning,
but
Additional
government
done
likely
HIPC
while
resources
Ðis
funding
Key
such
much
and
through
disbursed
have
in
Monterrey
billion
that
also
shocks,
has
largely
into
severity
from
that
one
toforecasts
very
Moreover,
reduction
some
rather
HIPC
budget
products.
broader
led
opponents
argued
the
aim
shocks
offset
dollar
higher
derailing
it
aid
from
contingency
little
Finance
OECD
by
Debates
measures
quantifying
the
to
been
funding
because
to2005.
(e.g.
has
than
Summit
financing,
and
disbursements
that
finance
within
reach
presented,
shocks
international
has
countries
less
value-added
and
amobilised
tozero-sum
frequency
inside
loans
bymultilateral
for
progress
it
made
which
So
of
ortheir
protect
many
aidÓ.
the
has
HIPC
donor
(AfDF,
aand
EU,
with
not
major
for
has
game
own
to
delays
records
whether
may
programmes
emerging
and
moment,
2002
diversion
Even
most
speed
away
provide
poverty.
programme
fund
In
extra
From:
FONDAD,
Matthew
resources.
bilateral
used
framework;
are
relief
will
This
an
(IMF/WB,
increase
Bank
from
billion
qualified
point
these
(foraddition,
individual
well
on
$1.5
ÐGuinea-Bissau,
though
aid
from
poverty
for
be
limited
assistance,
other
with
funding
HIPC
did
countries
or
whether
though
by
(Mali,
the
these
debt
February
Martin
of
aspread
be
delays
(see
Donors
bilateral
billion
2002c)
in
reductions
from
fast-disbursing
aid
budgets
the
to
year
by
not
at
which
Debt
As
OECD
additional
sources
overall
linked
debt
net
relief
reduction
the
fund
overall
the
promises
some
Section
levels
is
anon-HIPCs.
IADB
recipient
experience
Mauritania
the
27
over
for
in
need
Relief
result,
aid
indicates
flows
reflected
relief
it
international
available
2004,
in
and
fact
end
to
debt
to
HIPC
Monterrey
of
payments
Ðseparately.
all
increase
is
over
has
end-1999
several
Malawi,
in
to
fund
aadditionality
the
of
2the
contributions
in
that
do
provided.
-(see
www.fondad.org
relief.
(probably
HIPCs
grant
progress
is
below),
minimise
give
large
been
country
a2000.
Myths
2000-2002
total
increases
and
acceleration
appear
increased
programme
relief
that
either
aeight
long
oralso
of
years,
Nicaragua,
in
Summit
more
recipients
promised
PV
combined.
disbursements
Rwanda).
desirable,
amounts
Much
community
and
multilateral
Though
most
additionality
flows
this
period,
terms;
level.
(see
to
It
diversion
Section
by
related)
of
interruptions
desirable
Reality
there
is
due
in
will
promises
have
flows
is
aid
multilateral
to
HIPCs
the
advantage
to
Debate
of
disbursement
different
net
It
of
obvious
the
and,
Here
to
SHowever,
to
is
maximum
27
HIPCs
depend
2increased
is
given
aid
the
oto
remains
decision
ahave
increase
flows.
trust
not
and
below).
IMF
countries
Tom
in
way
not
debt
donors
strong
recent
resumption
6)
materialise.
HIPCs
are
HIPC
is spite
will
depends
that
maintain
the
PRGF-HIPC
experienced
in
on
can
of
choice
yet
and
from
estimated
this
funds,
being
institutions:
in
The
to
Trust
PRGF
points
whether
aid
represent
funding
fastest
way
have
of
evidence
BWI
in
continue,
be
diverting
acting
Senegal)
the
of
be
additionality
message
reaching
fall
these
loans
overcome,
flows
largely
in
it
diverted
analysis
of
programmes
good
seen
which
Fund
HIPC
also
Trust
and
At
how
designs
Fund
at
in
the
than
way
as
anand
funds
of
track
the
in
or
funded
about
is
flows
as
PRGF
funds
to
if
decision
on
to
over
aid
and
from
grants
itand
the
reduce
at$3.4
$3
for
implements
Faso
through
insisting
maintain
In
role
MDGs
additional
interpretation
prospective
ensuring
to
Summarising,
fund
compared
on
(especially
poverty
private
Debate
Proponents
Goals
contribution
2015,
does
the
The
freeing
Developing
(OECD/DAC,
estimates
annual
This
billion.
around
28
From:
FONDAD,
poverty
the
Assessing
availability
MDGs.
key
in:
and
development.
not
compares
it$3.2
HIPC
future,
degree
5:
shortfall
external
reducing
reduction
capital
issue
funds
February
Niger
debt
(i)
then
that
to
was
maximise
Even
that
HIPC
(World
IMF
grants
reduction
of
countries
2004).
Debt
increased
aid
fast-disbursing
billion
calculating
HIPC
to
not
the
sustainability.
mobilising
grant
HIPC
here
for
to
cancellation
programmes.
to
several
the
of
Can/Cannot
and
to
funding
Relief
borrowing
spending
which
designed
Bank,
of
total
HIPC
2004,
increase
to
debt
has
However,
spending),
the
government
According
IMF
flow
have
is
flows
private
sufficient
afunding
keep
rather
are
aid
produced
potential
the
year.
Initiative:
countries
and
sustainability
donors
2001;
-current
www.fondad.org
toMyths
suggested
the
financing
the
receiving
inof
debt
loans
go
Fund
to
degree
For
future
or
World
given
low-income
than
capital
and
MDGs
to
for
Asorder
necessary
to
and
do
spending
Zedillo,
grants,
supplement
all
example,
sustainable;
considerable
funding
the
aannual
and
for
countries
predictable
this.
contribution
attaining
(Ethiopia,
Bank
those
the
and
to
result,
funding
that
HIPCsÕ
The
towhich
and
aMillennium
most
Reality
anti-poverty
flows,
small
halving
total
the
reduce
need
to
countries.
Critics
on
2001)
HIPC
Key
growth
funding;
which
to
while
while
reliable
allow
it
poverty
debt
HIPC
ofrelief
IMF
which
meet
debt
the
HIPC
tothis
scale
overall
ofMali
(iii)
extra
with
budget
poverty
new
are
it
world
of
allowing
has
take
needs
Development
have
$55
MDGs.
would
makes
countries
the
relief
service
Debates
(ii)
are
can
debt
and
borrowing
spending;
donor
of
extra
reduction.
available
implies
recently
advocating
resources
billion
of
aonly
additionality
MDGs
aid
poverty
indicated
for
most
debt
make
provide
reduction
Rwanda)
more
mobilising
relief
only
encourages
Burkina
ÒfavouritesÓ.
aid
to
relief
attaining
will
to$1.5
committed
relief
asome
active
asupport
been
and
and,
by
$48
small
absorb
to
year
only
acut
depend
that
isbillion
flexible
funding
(iv)
and
in
theaid
it
Matthew
contribution
country
First,
payments
reduction
in
for
before
Uganda),
Leone
creditors,
Paris
which
debt
had
revenues
sustainabilityÓ
Second,
spent
negotiation
used
financial
desirable
sector
been
Independent
Office
spending
2002c)
by
relief
poverty
combined
However,
education
needed
(water
agriculture,
From:
welfare).
FONDAD,
1998-1999
half
a2002-2005).
service
to
subject
and
were
Club,
had
lower
on
HIPC
some
HIPC
activity
indicate
has
across
and
Martin
varies
the
reduce
during
reduction
February
even
Ðand
poverty
by
effects
focusing
ofDebt
Zambia).
mobilised
sector
Ðin
orleaves
but
not
sanitation,
HIPC
(Ethiopia,
and
amount
debt
with
reports
only
30the
(and
four
some
to
microcredit,
though
had
29Relief
considerably.
paying
whose
budget
1999-2002.
freed
funding
percent
Five
now
multilateral
was
and
transparent
that
countries
relief
reduction.
the
problems.
20
of
2004,
about
will
received
cases
spending
on
range
This
of
us
have
donors
reached.
counter-inflation
by
percent.
HIPC
BWI
countries
donor
BWIs
debt
social
huge
traditional
various
debt
deficits
short
Guinea-Bissau,
actually
NGOs
-feeder
www.fondad.org
the
during
45
is
Ðsavings
of
data
to
relief,
Myths
and,
not
relief
This
amounts
gender
are
apercent
extremely
to
service
contributions
These
has
Millennium
MDGs.
pay
Use
public
and
spending
ofThere
key
institutions
However,
indicate
(especially
pay
least
roads,
not
2001-2005
will
in
or
seems
increased
measuring
and
beprogrammes,
service
themselves
of
the
issue
alternative
on
new
social
aInReality
domestic
ofare
reducing
compared
paying
to
the
debate.
berural
considerable
few
for
US
its
addition,
concessional
as
to
funding
money
Honduras,
pay
strategies
the
Development
two
an
paying
for
savings
General
toanti-poverty
countries,
their
aown
show
sectors
compared
fell
dramatically
average
more
non-OECD
before
out
BWIs
percentage
main
two
these
may
debt,
and
electrification,
their
to
will
uses,
that
for
population
almost
of
sharply
positive
scheduled
(Mali,
types
not
is
Accounting
(IMF/World
the
reasons.
ÐNicaragua,
creditors;
amount
HIPC,
their
Ðor
increase
poverty
debt
to
treatment
subject
even
health
Goal
impact
government)
actually
they
while
have
PRSP
toof
actual
as
Niger,
once
due
expenditures
service
and
own
resolve
effects
if
needs
much
debtors:
of
are
not
GDP
process.
and
service
highly
reduction,
and
onÒdebt
HIPCsÕ
Bank,
HIPC
totheir
therefore
budget
service
from
and,
be
being
generally
has
smallholder
social
each
as
Sierra
theonrisen
the
those
social
private
5 For
Some
virtually
independent
methods
macroeconomic
elasticities
sources
necessary
framework,
vaccination),
their
but
reduction
insufficient
Under
linked
indebted
ineligible
aid
relief.
all
Millennium
still
efforts
are
increasing
As
Francophone
2015
resources
IDA-only
basis
poverty
There
financing
financing,
the
30
From:
FONDAD,
abasis
Assessing
has
was
HIPCs
not
have
result,
in
similar
budget
often
of
is
HIPC
toFebruary
for
and
produced
diverted
This
to
ÒfavouritesÓ
their
reduction.
eligible
countries
current
noargued
impossible
to
expenditure
the
are
for
needs
that
which
I,
HIPCs
Development
mobilise
aid.
and
Debt
analysts
such
components
been
Africa)
excuse
derived
reach
spending
to
distortion
it
the
views,
framework,
most
targets
amount
eligible
HIPC
poverty
simply
costings
reach
is
in
Relief
that
costings.
takes
defensible
or
to
based
poverty
HIPC
2004,
HIPCs
public
of
obvious
and
which
for
PRSPs
non-HIPC
eligible
additional
are
see
to
and
from
of
data
which
needs.
based
the
set
reduction
abandoning
Initiative:
ofare
the
for
Goals.
on
PRGF
-not
www.fondad.org
cost
debt
targeted
has
like-minded
not
EURODAD
UN
using
are
indicators
and
Myths
national
growth
investment
MDGs.5
for
available
and
These
individual
relief,
that
trying
agencies
are
estimates,
on
been
even
programmes;
not
the
This
relief
poor
HIPCs
most
then
However,
poverty
But
methodological
poverty
HIPC
aid,
and
relatively
many
have
100
(2002)
spending
are
and
reduced
aiming
the
isReality
countries
poverty
indebted
to
The
poverty
to
and
and
debt
especially
donor
or
percent
have
based
the
levels;
by
fastest
HIPCs
been
quantify
mobilise
goal
sectoral
reduction
supplement
Key
HIPCs
reduction
which
can
government
norelief
aid
to
and
government
by
needs
developed
reduction
countries
allocated
of
HIPC
onaccurate
surveys,
easy
means
make
(notably
Ðreach
Sachs
available.
risked
HIPC
additional
themselves,
or
indicate
poverty
rather
reaching
problems
either
MDG
the
MDGs
for
Debates
athe
to
will
were
some
and
aornecessary
inadequate
II,
(2002).
more
commitment
costs
attain
cost,
simple
losing
those
many
GDP
and
expenditure
(such
targets
aid,
who
those
largely
than
athe
be
strongly
reduction,
because
progress
MDGs
orthat
make
micro
The
growth
then
woefully
are
and
that
and
with
HIPCs
onthe
as
process,
funds
in
by
MDGs
poverty
most
itfunding
debt
have
to
the
modeling
child
aggregates
almost
to
toon
insufficient
which
those
and
asthe
Matthew
might
PRSPs
MDGs,
must
attainment
non-HIPCs.
wider
financing
annual
IDA-only
cooperation
countries
basis,
based
Afghanistan,
Moldova,
into
would
Club
for
by
Summarising,
reduce
excessive
freed
reduction.
maximise
surrounded
reach
maximum
Debate
The
MDGs
policies
Millennium
Poverty
needed
From:
FONDAD,
the
HIPC
more
thereafter
the
ofnot
should
and
range
on
also
by
the
HIPC
examination
countries
IMF),
the
6:
toMartin
the
contribution
Reduction
February
Initiative
low
Nigeria,
international
countries
HIPC
its
important
are
beDebt
the
poverty
are
and
MDGs,
HIPC
receive
ofÒEvian
deserve
debt
However,
by
Development
ofallowing
with
able
analyse
income
Bangladesh,
are
the
contribution
potential
the
receiving
hindering
II
other
31Relief
countries,
Conditionality
ensure
relief
burden
or
the
awhich
HIPC
were
2004,
toissue
MDGs.
reduction
Pakistan
Strategy
debt
offunding
analysis.
TermsÓ
but
small
bydoes
and
the
becountries
the
BWIs,
tothe
Initiative
explicitly
measures
that
could
might
community,
on
of
Goals.
-relief
www.fondad.org
mobilised.
sources
high
growth.
current
the
financing
nothing
Cambodia,
step
is
Myths
given
debt
countries
a(which
to
towhether
and
Papers
all
(see
maximum
vague
group
which
MDGs
and
benefit
debt
The
poverty
see
in
Will/Will
According
under
sustainability
Turkmenistan.
to
and
ofin
its
debt
It
design
totowhich
should
Debate
recent
open
the
was
targeted
whether
burdens,
Cuba
basis,
of
would
ensure
HIPCs
and
the
Haiti,
was
make
Reality
PRGF
fund
themselves,
possible
all
HIPC-related
HIPC
reliefÕs
from
right
primarily
countries
reduction
the
growth
financing,
and
only
of
7fund
introduction
ensure
low-income
Not
rapid
to
define
strongly
scenarios
poverty
subject
that
II,
below).
all
substantial
Indonesia,
door
for
HIPC
would
Zimbabwe
direction.
proponents,
from
Accelerate
the
debt
On
provide
needed
superior
of
spending
debt
enough
totheir
designed
where
relief
spending;
that
the
indevelopment
reduction
MDGs
all
the
include
to
1999
advocate
and
This
relief.
debt
project
relief
countries.
policy
analysis
all
todoes
PRGFeligible/
most-indebted
Iraq,
by
it
progress
enormous
inthe
debt
reintegration
that
qualities
justifies
cancellation
on
attain
the
to
was
HIPCs
aactions
nor
Onnot
poverty
makes
that
in
much
reduction,
Kyrgyz,
the
Paris
seen
this
conducted
is
tofunds
the
IMF
all
it
the
in
as
the
potential
They
in
pre-designed
with
merely
focused
consultation
countries
their
imposed
preventing
HIPC
development.
concern
at
January
and
occurred
decision
point
completion
momentum
What
by
international
design
poverty
Òtrade-offÓ
PRSPs
However,
staff
that
causing
been
conditions
three
months.
32
From:
FONDAD,
which
the
Assessing
10able
represent
virtually
ministers
is
traditional
own
argue
and
have
confirm
of
HIPC
aFebruary
had
welcome
and
reduction.
on
about
2004,
the
reduction
almost
As
debt
reflection
HIPC
in
point.
of
recent
6-12
for
which
9poverty
to
poverty
HIPCs,
and
reached
points
execution
generally
aon
Debt
that
the
completion
2000
cause
orbymonths,
of
implement
result,
the
growth,
delay
relief
28
NGOs
what
schedule.
aRelief
no
delaying
are
vociferousness
ÒtensionÓ
all
external
the
are
second
Since
discussions
fundamental
externally-designed
countries
is
conditionality
HIPC
2004,
popular
reduction
overriding
delayed,
of
strategies
Under
reduction,
becoming
Ðcompletion
HIPC
the
ofataken
poor
most
in
disappearing.
was
respectively
this
has
of
poverty
then
two
Initiative:
national
reaching
half
point.
delay.
their
-maximum
www.fondad.org
poverty
new
Ministers
Five
linked
funders,
HIPC
in
serious
been
between
Myths
consultation,
delay?
ofhad
only
by
longer
each
strategies.
increasingly
of
participatory
with
shift
Ðall
PRGF
have
12-24
reduction
II,
and
point
All
an
of
that
Only
begun
2000
leading
of
and
toand
development
reduction,
5the
rather
country,
in
popular
average
The
HIPC
rapid
agreed
in
designed
begins
countries
of
than
have
macroeconomic
had
four
The
away
conditionality
4relief
months
Reality
designing
Ðdecision
when
theory,
conditionality
to
the
popular
publications
of
but
country
PRGF
Key
tothe
HIPC
expected
been
than
African
from
and
Critics
benefit
byHIPC
consultation,
strident
and
16
rest
ofsodelays
nearly
is
processes
much
and
through
growth
sustainable
recipient
paying
strategies
countries
have
17
and
saying
PRSP
15
the
conditionality
that
and
is
perception
being
and
have
civil
two
months,
discussion
African
HIPCs
Debates
ofprocesses
finalised.
from
slow
to
and
pre-HIPC
completion
all
reached
that
debt
implementing
or
in
by
of
little
participatory
HIPC
had
delayed
finalise.
for
continues
societies
to
structural
sustainable
their
HIPC
of
PRSPs.
Bretton
0-6
more
are
governments
reached
was
which
relief
decision
and
design
two
HIPCs
development.
II
Ðthis
decision
months,
having
period
attention
relief
caused
of
than
too
and
As
the
by
years
are
ishave
points
are
progress
the
Woods
goes
to
of
and
the
often
24and
Ðbetoto
Matthew
completion
delay
Some
relief
policies.
end
programme
community
rigid
frameworks
countries
in
mobilisation,
eleven
structural
these
delayed
proliferation
especially
the
proliferation.
conditions
There
recent
more
from
2002
one
limited
those
being
reducing
has
Fund
surveillance
be
However,
Ministers
have
From:
FONDAD,
overambitious
allowed.
ofseen
reflected
fourth
year
indicated
within
to
IMF
that
could
isPRGFs
and
will
has
countries
placed
HIPC
isFebruary
2000
countries.
Martin
PRGFs
macro
evidence
due
to
if
inflation
it
Abeing
implementation.
generally
unsuccessful,
with
been
the
and
little
points
to
conditions
for
quarter
may
reduce
Debt
the
few
was
World
this
istosenior
have
on
inthree
reach
causing
in
of
issues
period
that
33Relief
inflation
those
As
become
some
easy
PRGFs.
BWIs
delayed
suggest
bad
with
growth
which
targets
at
new
will
of
sign
2004,
delayed
Second,
poverty).
the
streamlined
Bank
its
ofto
and
for
because
believe
factors.
lower
least
recent
more
argue
poverty
Ðcountries
of
inflation
officials
expenditure
from
2001
latest
problems
cause
lending
more
ofbut
programmes;
and
deficits;
countries
-exaggerate
www.fondad.org
byMyths
that
and
execution
around
for
flexibility
byflexibility
However,
inflation
insistence
eleven
that
failure
past
when
progress
with
anti-poverty
itBWI
that
Delays
major
PRSPs,
the
First,
expenditure
reduction
conditionality,
role,
undermined
which
for
below
of
and
5this
ESAF/PRGFs
the
some
ÒstampedeÓ
traditional
delay
countries;
Board
and
which
percent.
overruns
of
problems
the
34ofand
HIPCs
in
progress
(ii)
Reality
aseither
over-rigid
targets
BWI
todelay
reached
astructural
5on
(iv)
HIPCs
HIPCs
executing
change
opposed
performance
paper
reduce
full
percent,
are
in
executing
staff
an
the
spending
move
and
containment
country
aprogramme
the
isin
This
and
(regardless
agreement
for
Òpost-stabilisationÓ,
indicate
toof
of
even
and
PRSP
macro
recent
the
conditionality
decision
indicates,
to
justified
began
conditionality:
limiting
macro
toconditions.
implement
decision
fiscal
revenue
future.
funding;
letting
results
such
third,
conditions
awith
international
in
could
than
eleven
seriousness
Òleft-overÓ
framework
system
criteria,
IMF
implementation
ÒpoststabilisationÓ
to
framework
that
and
conditions
in
more
and
points
on
shortfalls
of
the
reverse
conditions
be
paper
them
Ðmost
points
such
March
(iii)
where
agreed
revenue
further
of
i.e.
macroeconomic
whether
less
stress
moving
has
for
design
before
(2003b)
inthan
(i)
very
would
ofthat
at
such
been
have
the
them
the
for
their
ownAComprehensive
compliance
promotes
across
organisations;
analysed
especially
frameworks
countries;
macroeconomic
trade-offs
criteria
in
IMF
Òpost-stabilisationÓ
and
potential
¥policies
ensure
poverty
The
can
have
had
Fund
from
Club
are
combined
providing
34
From:
FONDAD,
Continued
Elimination
Poverty
More
Explicit
Flexibility
Rapid
1999-2001.
Assessing
alternative
following
would
civil
comprehensive
delay
result
IMF
off-track
already
programmes,
the
has
HIPC
the
flexible
they
definition
reduction.
interim
February
rather
to
for
on
African
also
with
reduce
societies
and
in
an
with
programmes
of
presentation
examined.
in
Debt
progress
be
poverty
are
countries
completion
reached
immediate
the
measures
of
Social
all
scenarios
in
actual
the
been
with
suspension
essential
conditions.
than
macroeconomic
programmes
streamlining
relief
Relief
all
interpreting
its
and
Development
HIPC
2004,
micro-management
PRGF
annual
cancellation
ofreduction.
threatening
Fund
infive
impedes
to
structural
Impact
lending
nations.
impact
their
ofwww.fondad.org
more
Initiative:
are
programmes;
which
African
suspended
-ÒshockÓ
streamline
in
which
points
programmes.
all
to
review
of
Myths
countries
essential
all
precise
to
limits
growth
Analysis
of
aid
the
multilateral
suffered
role
conditionality
Bank
frameworks
show
compliance
build
PRGF
countries
macroeconomic
is
or
to
and
conditions
Ðof
attainment
due
and
of
expiry
for
by
suspend
is
the
The
and
of
the
circumstances
PRSPs,
Reality
documents
the
had
Suspension
ofKey
growing
to
the
disastrous
their
from
move
IDA
economy,
number
poverty
growth
ensure
macroeconomic
capacity
falling
run
orHIPC
in
with
to
of
end
and
PRGFs
interim
relief
which
excessive
to
inof
of
economies.
all
design
and
debt
out
and
concern
bilateral
of
and
poverty
surveillance
interpreting
that
the
reduction,
of
and
Debates
PRGFs
and
promoting
off-track
of
2003.
for
conditionalities
have
alternative
under
of
structural
relief.
for
inflation
relief,
relief
MDGs:
and
interim
should
conditionality
governments
PRSCs,
any
proliferation
because
countries
not
for
reduction
The
which
analyse
country,
ÐThree
been
and
poststabilisation
three
with
Paris
be
for
to
relief
their
thewhich
it the
countries
their
have
6 Aid,
and
Matthew
assiduously
the
urgently
same
circumstances
Countries
problems
encountered
Serieux,
integration
for
are
(which
HIPC
of
to
debt
Debate
Advocates
economically
Detailed
because:6
than
programmes.
conditional
¥country
preferable
From:
lending.
FONDAD,
This
Debt
Under
allow
these
deliver
Williamson
other
conflict
not
percentage
framework.
service
new
other
HIPC
section
is
7:
relief
NGO
Martin
best
the
ownership.
February
toof
that
2002).
more
countries
analysis
aid.
multilateral
coming
the
Debt
HIPC
forms
sources
flows
to
Debt
avoided
design
lengthy
into
new
than
prevention
placed
ratios
debt
preferable,
except
have
rapid
responsibility
has
is
FDI,
summarises
(2002)
35
Relief
of2004,
Though
The
relief
PRSP
Relief
from
HIPC,
of
much
other
and
relief
has
greater
rules
debt
excluded
(as
of
portfolio
except
delays
to
post-war
fragility
immediately
development
complete
framework,
debt
for
conflict
Is/Is
concluded
more
financing,
development
recent
they
handle),
well
very
-finance
www.fondad.org
service
and
for
have
but
Myths
earlier
similar
political
relief
inNot
stable,
them
need
resolution
as
rapidly,
extending
reconstruction
of
others
investment
extreme
rupture
entering
measures
of
stated
situations
conflict-affected
and
reduction
the
and
Preferable
finance.
that
debt
from
much
peace
unless
are
analysis
views.
banks
predictable
therefore
Reality
flexibility
BWIs),
free
have
resonance
with
that
debt
relief
by
circumstances.
of
international
stronger
interim
the
have
(which
and
itsuggested
far
and
and
relations
funds
asis
or
heavy
debt
relief
inhard-window
HIPC
if
reconciliation
toaccelerated
and
could
the
the
in
governance
increase
Martin
HIPC
they
Other
in
tied
early
for
relief
and
previous
Initiative
in
supply
frontloading
cheapest
Paris
neighbours)
is
OECD
betoo
with
and
the
are
reconstruction.
that
counter-cyclical
support,
Financing
more
(2002a).
The
interventions
less
(providing
is
countries
developing
Club
the
macro
response
to
tightly
aflows,
their
it
official
IMF,
years)
morally
desirable
country.
progress
in
(see,
BWIs
isneed
earlier
framework
most
requires
to
See
IDA,
initial
notoreduce
inbetter
the
and
also
IMF
allus
in the
Birdsall
987theMost
Seecurrent
Government
Elbadawi
HIPCsscale
would
andofand
Gelb
rather
Tanzania
potential
(2002)
rely(2001);
onfordomestic
aid.
domestic
Government
financing.
financing
of Uganda
But
is limited,
(2002).
in many countries
and domestic
is much more
debt
stressed the need
expensive
to provide
than external
free accessfinancing.
to developed
HIPC ministers
country markets,
have therefore
increase
value
They
(2000).
financing
project
and
non-HIPC
reduction.
aid
the
domestic
management
in
For
support.
external
especially
counter-cyclical,
meet
¥However,
debt
alignment
highly
Fund
To
36
From:
FONDAD,
Untied
The
HIPC
Debt
If
more
avoid
Assessing
intest
flows
evidence
all
have
their
HIPC
relief
conditionality
added
transaction
HIPC
debt
relief,
vulnerable
aid,
flexible
the
February
capital
financing,
debt
investment,
financing.9
these
this,
also
development
and
stalls,
ofrate
have
if
promises)
Debt
ofthe
relief
above
which
FDI
on
donors
relief
relief,
domestic
frontloaded
their
suggested
increases
arguments
donors
risk
positive
encouraged
Relief
into
or
forms
HIPC
2004,
costs
reasons,
has
it
is
absorbs
aims
has
ways
see
other
behind
remains
exports,
and
than
Ais
promotes
can
linked
suspension
than
aid
no
need
Initiative:
had
private
such
-dollar
www.fondad.org
AERC
of
to
much
that
which
aid
linkages
in
cost,
should
suspend
Myths
project-specific
all
Ðand
other
more
areduce
donors
debt
Fund
to
anti-poverty
as
because
rigidly
too
(1998
have
positive
weaker.8
and
much
flows
private
of
ownership
keep
complement
savings
multiyear
is
and
payment
relief
not
conditionality
of
stringent,
flows.
debt
fast-disbursing
procure
much
poverty
among
to
high
The
can
and
Fund
their
Reality
except
it
be
to
provide
flows
effect
relief
Key
beassistance.
2001);
greater
are
and
is
value
pushed
its
capacity,
other
and
spending
coordinated
programme
aid-financed
done
domestic
directly,
the
more
HIPC
much
financing.
grants.
investment,
progress.
this
dofor
poverty
ontoo
more
isand
flows,
preferable
atis
value
not
stable
makes
Debates
lower
private
much
money,
programme
the
Martin
exchange
and
aid
far:
savings.
target
unacceptable.
aid
whereas
reduction.
Asfor
and
budget
more
The
flows
micro
than
Ðimproved
and
goods
whereas
long
dis-
capital
and
(1999b)
money
form
growing
poverty
valuable
predictable,
those
rate
aid
level
For
much
(if
as
from
ofand
inPRSPs
fiscal
more
flows,7
and
of
other
toÐ Johnson
provide
on HIPCs.
Matthew
bursement
aretain
maximising
finance)
individual
finance
composition
strategic
Mozambique
grants
as
funds
arrears
money
in
HIPCs,
(though,
percent
increase
¥from
civil
more
performing
the
In
also
of
and
coordinate
domestic
Innes,
From:
FONDAD,
policy
The
Countries
Potential
In
high
aid,
debt,
addition,
their
most
private
addition,
debt
additional
the
consensus
do
amount
before
since
society
HIPC
the
and
2003;
Martin
required
as
performers
which
increased
aof
February
dialogue
is
as
exceeds
in
current
indebted
funding
savings
decisions
relations
relief).
great
flexibility
recipient
developing
receives
programme
15
the
exports.
best
such
Debt
not
of
which
HIPC
already
debt
aid
sectors
ofpressure
HIPC
aid
Martin,
percent
they
37Relief
each
even
majority
behind
related
and
debt
in
deal
flows,
toÐflows
arrived.
relief,
aid
international
donors
for
and
2004,
based
had
(e.g.
incould
are
poverty
independent
halve
countryÕs
between
75
if
discussed,
So
especially
than
choice
relief
aid,
flows
relief.
more
development.
tax
Johnson
countries,
as
terms
made
increasing
toand
percent
now
Monterrey
potential
for
-and
www.fondad.org
onMyths
Rwanda)
to
ofprogramme
equivalent
there
revenues
support
them.
but
to
also
overall
MDG
huge
having
HIPCs
poor
in
debt
reduction
all
(and
donors
of
providers
improve
and
donor
Mali
only
how
or
of
poverty
many
trade
political
is
do
sides
and
ofAguilar,
It
efforts
or
people
relief
additional
or
promises
mean
gains
aid
recipient
anti-poverty
its
to
behind
Developing
more
(Martin,
HIPC/PRGF
progress
to
continues
and
receives
aid,
which
ten
Reality
group
of
torepay
are
Ðflows
the
could
fund
aaid
of
the
reduction
live
them
fine
HIPCs,
from
has
some
towhen
to
diversion
had
much
climate,
more
private
quality
and
as
produce
monitor,
2003).
poverty
levels
country.
mobilise
(e.g.
waned,
to
do
2002a;
country
towards
and
only
in
acould
each
of
processes
to
grants
both
large
country
historical/
100
and
greater
countries
debt
more
performance
non-HIPCs
which
higher-quality
depend
35Martin
policy.
DRC)
percentage
capital
and
These
ofto
are
large
from
also
percent
averages
given
there
reduction.
amounts
relief.
negotiate
policies
the
For
and
percent
additional
poverty
may
value
governments
regarded
have
than
generate
and
on
non-
benefit
measures
MDGs,
example,
35
increases
that
is
which
not
flows
and
the
cancellation
byasRose-
of
lost
only
those
for orare
international
be
andnew
could
money
10have
would
development
Extra
part
Financing
reallocations
source
multilateral
Summarising,
be
of
access
promote
MDGs.
in
governments
2flexibly
Advocates
has
broadening
funding
conditionality
inadequate
poverty
the
needs
being
Improving
sustainability.
HIPC
point
to
38
From:
FONDAD,
What
transferred
complemented
new
this
using
Assessing
made
international
ofHIPC
could
have
debt
In
to
complemented
by:
ofFebruary
official
(especially
Could
the
domestic
chapter,
for
reduction
addition,
and
major
achieve
debt
Facility;
funds
and
HIPC
(i)
much
relief
burden-sharing
to
aim
Debt
funding.
Monterrey
would
development,
development
debt
not
HIPC
the
ofto
critics
fulfil
abandoning
stock
progress
towards
greater
available
by
and
Relief
SDRs
savings
especially
so
much
HIPC
2004,
could
fund
relief
in
prefer
Achieve
to
community
provide
relief
for
unless
by
gold
private
tightly
and
developing
its
reach
pledges
by
of
more,
wider
Initiative:
debt
exports
-poverty
www.fondad.org
effects
be
in
debt
reinvestment
bank
is
programme
and
own
the
Myths
for
?HIPC
among
genuine
funded
advocating
the
relief
in
financing,
with
linked
is
by
measures
IMF
investment,
HIPC
changing
aims,
concept
service
and
development,
reserves,
other
principle
with
is
reduction.
Millennium
serious
improving
and
onregard
countries
creditors,
ÐThe
from
the
reformed
Initiative
debt
the
which
by
aid
to
let
Reality
countries
higher
toKey
of
asproposed
or
other
PRGFs.
debt
the
quality
many
and
which
alone
about
sustainability
capital
to
guarantee
present
the
sales,
remains
the
in
its
Ðmobilising
focus
However,
Development
HIPC
and
measures
added
in
PRGF
sustainability,
sources,
creditors;
but
order
measures
best
is
are
the
own
and
the
ofvalue
International
could
Debates
ordesign,
and
HIPC
conditionality,
managed
ofthe
value),
both
wider
MDGs,
sustainable
way
by
to
ways
long-term
issuance
Bretton
itprovisions.
to
including
only
easily
relief
large
attain
oftoHIPC
correct.
additional
remains
Goals.
at
and
and
enhance
suggested
goal
more
debt
fund
and
completion
ÒoffbudgetÓ
returning
limited
amounts
Woods
and
needs
the
of
debt
tofinancing
If
by
burden;
trade
HIPC
HIPC
to
Matthew
(ii)
debt
on
percent;
domestic)
non-HIPC
debt,
more
government
implicitly)
analysis;
revenue
maximising
of
encouraging
relief
multilateral
reduction
creating
themselves
against
international
arbitration
suits,
debtors
cancellations
ensuring
resources,
HIPC
by
programmes
eliminating
demonstrated
poverty
overall
individual
macroeconomic
Poverty
From:
FONDAD,
reserves,
relief.
streamlining
ifHIPC
service
stable
could
and
from
and
Martin
PV
ratio
HIPCs
where
reduction;
efforts
and
February
(iii)
aresources;
that
debt
assisting
(vi)
facility
isSocial
liabilities;
freeing
maximise
Trust
received
providing
thereby
accelerate
of
criteria;
Debt
financing,
government
multilateral
their
fora
all
for
and
debt;
to
retained,
below
debt
necessary;
by
all
frameworks
scenarios
39Relief
analysing
burdens
focusing
conditionality
structural
be
and
developing
reducing
Fund
putting
and
some
2004,
own
such
multilateral
ofoutcomes,
(ii)
to
ÒstandstillÓ
forcing
essential
interpreting
Impact
(iv)
the
10
burden-sharing
debt
debtor
rapid
designing
funds
resources,
cover
to
Paris
the
and
to
guaranteed
percent
-cancellations
www.fondad.org
ensuring
private
(v)
sustainability
widening
and
government
monitoring
institutions
relieve
cancellation;
them
and
in
Myths
the
ensure
delivery
Analysis
reducing
response
all
and
countries
continuing
for
non-OECD
and
Club
all
growth-inflation
(iv)
toPV/budget
at
rather
from
creditors
far
micro-conditions
more
and
sector
poverty
procedures,
creditor
having
compliance
PRGFs,
that
and
HIPC
the
creditors
debt
counting
byflexible
of
more
bilateral
(PSIA)
Reality
domestic
them
and
the
legal
torelief
use
commercial
centre
are
than
itwhich
by
private
all
to
debts
todramatically,
in
on
a(iii)
revenue
analyzing
decision
reduction
move
really
linking
where
fund
of
jurisdictions
genuinely
to
major
obtain
include
debt
attaining
creditors,
technical
implementation
of100
as
with
the
to
of
ensuring
share
tofully
combating
and
aid
growth-oriented
present
tradeoffs;
all
debts
more
necessary
sustainability
creditors
discussions
percent
impact
measures
threshold
total
IDA
creditors,
which
conditions
itthe
total
less
point,
avoid
organisations;
con-
private
all
in
ofadditional,
freeing
toalternative
ado
commercial
assistance
the
by
that
expensive
(explicitly
debt
their
cancellation
burden
across
are
on
their
(external
not
lawsuits
forestall
debt
its
and
(i)
comprehensive
the
using
early
which
growth
of
tobased
sector
international
not
become
service/budget
and
on
debtor
suspension,
onthe
HIPC
time
earnings
150
of years
debt
have
to
HIPC.
and
and
such
on
cost
orof of
ditionalities,
conducted
defining
reduce
nations;
build
societies
macroeconomic
comprehensive
ensure
avoiding
discussions
relief
reconstruction
Complementary
Given
financing,
first,
all
judge
MDGs;
countries
However,
enough
Many
and
Elbadawi
2003;
much
to
investment
In
dependency.
unsustainable
ending
loans
that
40
From:
FONDAD,
developed
particular,
Assessing
IDA-only
ensuring
private
measures
more
all
the
debt
whether
and
Martin,
to
HIPC
its
they
measures
immediately
to
irresponsible
February
rapidly
establishing
relief
debt
and
the
finance
byDebt
capacity
to
second,
also
finance
onlending
reliefÕs
HIPC-style
and
are
with
flows
countries
design
moderately-
that
Gelb,
increasing
country
public
the
and
annual
Measures
relief
to
Johnson
debt
especially
and
maximise
tax
new
promoting
suspension
for
Relief
the
increase
provided
HIPC
2004,
structural
implementing
debt
the
are
role
of
reconciliation.
(and
relief
2002;
revenues,
external
burden.
and
conflict-affected
superiority
sector
precise
review
international
cannot
markets,
lending
comprehensive
low-income
relief
MDGs
therefore
and
Initiative:
with
-relief
www.fondad.org
and
analyse
annually)
liquidity
the
oris
Martin,
Myths
the
poverty
should
(and
Aguilar,
except
This
inindependent
move
of
severely-indebted
be
value-added
financing
circumstances
policies
could
in
by
for
macroeconomic
measures
all
and
HIPCs,
PRSPs,
the
large,
improve
and
the
in
vital
order
can
creditors,
toThe
country
part-fund
2002a;
priority
reduction
in
analysing
relief
developing
on
community;
principle
be
Paris
2003).
Reality
surveillance
programmes
potential
be
cases
promoting
assure
ondone
PRGFs
countries
expanded
additional
(for
to
needs
Key
for
the
third-party
Martin
of
governments
poverty
ClubÕs
in
reduce
PRSPs
PRSP
HIPC
inthemselves
of
their
other
quality
long
exports
who
framework
and
the
order
to
in
ascountries
countries.
which
and
complete
and,
tolong-term
the
beyond
and
domestic
avoid
two
should
projects
Debates
PRSCs,
ato
debt
new
lists
need
for
reduction;
progress
(e.g.
oractual
form
to
above
accelerating
free
of)
Rose-Innes,
and
ways,
assistance;
the
Evian
welldistributed
ÒpoststabilisationÓ
and
sustainability
fund
also
recreating
HIPCs
of
avoid
toto
breakdown
of
middle-income)
net
their
IMF
funds
so
savings,
PRGFs,
civil
impact
ways;
these,
first
development
towards
terms
the
to
aid
asall
official
avoid
awill
by
focus
access
for
to
MDGs.
bynonconcessional
ofoftheof
debt
see
an
MEFMI
external
finance
Private
Acountries
all
data
the
reduction
trying
thereafter
of
Thereafter,
to
stability)
flexible
and
genuine
including:
more
natural
their
reduce
diversification
markets
implications
contingency
immediately;
multi-donor
From:
FONDAD,
Matthew
funding
financing
spent;
irresponsible
Capacity-Building
itskey
financing.
the
progress
PRSPs
potential
costs
augmenting
partner
and
realistic,
and
first
baseline
HIPC
to
MDGs,
MDGs
vulnerability
and
Capital
protection
disasters,
for
February
Martin
white
financing
methodological
debt
WAIFEM)
to
the
of
elasticities
quantify
ensure
will
making
Debt
second,
poverty
step
the
(apart
such
measures
budget
institutions
monitor
the
rather
of
and,
provide
financing
sources
relief
elephants,
borrowing
relief
scenarios;
41
each
Capacity-Building
single
be
by
into
possible
Relief
tomaking
MDGs
products,
2004,
will
that
projections
Programme,
in
MDG
from
protecting
requires
including
commodity
support
support.
by
reduction.
mobilising
than
major
and
could
to
higher
in
better
the
of
are
if
improving
bePRSPs,
are
financing
all
-largest
www.fondad.org
and
constraints
their
shocks,
in
analyse
the
abandoning
necessary
shocks,
aid
Myths
and
(BEAC/BCEAO
building
next
quantifiable
focusing
creditor
calculable.
its
help
and
which
developing
growth
more
value-added
Òdevelopment
financing.
all
price
more
improve
run
own
them
in
Atwo
all
PRGF
factor
providing
by
and
by
e.g.
debt
similar
private
needs
comprehensive
HIPC
Ôlikely
and
can
by
Programme,
economic
quantifying
predictable
capacity
years,
types
needed
against
reassessing
to
volatility
in
Reality
or
to
scenarios
them
Debt
commodity
mobilising
be
the
Pmanagement
keeping
reduce
and
PRSPs
countries.
donor,
these
and
There
in
le-Dette,
Though
products,
disbursed
programme,
capital
of
due
shocksÕ
disaster
quality
valueÓ
Relief
encouraging
to
PRSPs.
PRGF
growth/poverty
policy
Òexternal
inPV
financing
onwill
attain
calculations,
is
to
inhedging,
project
countries
financing
and
34up-front
there
sustainability
mechanisms,
programmes
realistic
no
anticipated
burdens.
for
to
International
providing
flows.
The
(HIV/AIDs,
CEMLA,
ofHIPCs
be
and
aid
opening
insurance;
to
stable,
excuse
end
the
all
each
assisting
are
IMF
shocksÓ.
offset
HIPC
them
is
the
political
shortfalls)
Foreign
MDGs,
on
export
their
to
important
must
However,
measures
pledges
dollar
for
attainment
OECD
via
all
to
sustainable
many
course
analyse
lack
regular
shocks
Including
assess
and
not
More
annually
flexible
14ofofto
even
in in
Finally,
to
HIPCs
international
Initiative
existing
representation
developing
dialogue
governments
Furthermore,
of
together
and
must
especially
civil
The
opportunity
countries.
have
believe
poverty
match
African
References
potential.
Reform
ÐÐÐÐÐ
Abidjan.
the
Baball,
Key
Bhattacharya,
MDGsÓ,
Economics
42
From:
FONDAD,
beIssues
international
Assessing
HIPC
technical
international
4th
maintain
played
heard
and
society
these
(2002),
HIPC
inFebruary
Paper
that
can
Economic
Senior
Balliram
toÐAfrica,
international
with
governments
low-income
countries
those
The
and
Debt
implement
more
by
ato
reach
expectations
Europe
HIPC
all
for
the
fora,
open-minded
expertise
the
capacity
large
ÒBudget
Amar
their
for
creating
achieve
HIPC
Policy
ChallengesÓ,
Relief
loudly
civil
from
poor
Research
(2002),
the
HIPC
2004,
heads
II
funding
financial
the
special
this
(2003),
held
inAnnual
Initiative
part
countries
wider
or
was
and
the
HIPCs
countries
Millennium
Revenue
Seminar,
Initiative:
order
groupings
society
on
-massive
www.fondad.org
purpose,
creditors.
their
of
in
created
international
in
only
ÒMonitoring
Myths
above
leadership
of
macroeconomic
Consortium
edition
international
needs
the
some
ÒFrom
Paris
themselves,
community
inspiring
Debt
Bank
toMobilisation
international
own
if
are
Bretton
campaigners
poverty
January.
and
reforms,
assert
of
which
for
do
because
by
Development
we
Relief
Debt
Conference
onMinisterial
of
The
better
This
their
Poverty
Reality
not
the
ensure
15-16
financing
by
(1998),
African
Private
faces
the
are
Relief
Key
their
Woods
financial
reduction
provide
is
energy
some
and
policy
International,
two
discussions:
they
officials.
represented
international
committed
May.
HIPC
why
(especially
civil
Reduction
HIPC
in
expand
an
onsets
own
institutions
policymakers
Goals.
Financial
Development
Sector
to
are
Network.
AfricaÓ,
poverty
HIPCs
and
issues.
unique
Development
Debates
them
reaches
Achieving
views
institutions,
society
inofit
dominated
commitment
OECD
the
to
Results
External
voices
with
have
Strategies
itMarch.
in
into
onits
reduction.
Jubilee,
reducing
Sector
Report
poorest
community
isthe
governments
advocates,
Review,
sufficient
pursued
and
in
building
need
vital
by
can
full
G-7
Debt:
HIPC
G-7
of
larger
and
2000),
that
aMost
to
Bhinda,
Matthew
Perception
and
Finance
Birdsall,
Performance:
Help
Center
Global
Washington
CAFOD,
ÒDebt
Cohen,
August.
PromisesÓ,
OECD/DAC
Paris.
Bank
Dublin,
Debt
Management
HIPCsÓ,
for
Development
HIPC
ÐÐÐÐÐ
BWIs
7th
From:
FONDAD,
Global
Urgent
HIPC
ThemselvesÓ,
Relief:
and
Relief
Ministerial
to
(2002),
and
(2000),
(2003b),
(2002a),
HIPC
Development,
for
Development/Institute
EURODAD,
Daniel
Martin
Nils,
and
International,
September.
March.
Express
February
(2004),
Development
IMF
Ministerial
Nancy
David
John
the
and
Poverty
Global
D.C.,
OECD
CapacityÓ,
Action
Debt
others
Index:
Cooperation
International
GoalsÓ,
How
from
Cancel
Stephany
ÒPrivate
Millennium
(2000),
ÒImplementing
43Relief
Reality,
Williamson
ÒFinancing
ÒImplementing
and
Roodman
Jubilee
Development
Concern
Rich
April
Development
Network
Meeting,
2004,
In:
Development,
IMF
on(1999),
AReductionÓ,
Michael
Washington
100
Press
Scorecard
Coalition
HIPC,
Meeting,
Countries
CGD
Gold
ÒThe
London,
Griffith-Jones,
Capital
-March.
www.fondad.org
FONDAD,
(2003b),
Research
Directorate,
percent
About
Development
(2003a),
Myths
Brief,
with
(2003),
Release,
HIPC
Kigali,
Private
to
HIPC
PRSPs
Clemens
Centre
the
for
Co-operation
HIPC
aand
November.
HIPC
Washington
Flows,
mimeo,
D.C.,
of
April.
Brian
Ireland
DevelopmentÓ,
The
Can
New
Initiative:
of
HIPC
Vol.
ÒThe
International
and
Rich
ÒAssessment
ÒHIPC
April.
II:
Capital
Technical
Poor
Dubai,
InitiativeÓ,
Reality
Hague.
(2003a),
Help
Aid
April
Deese
Christian
GoalsÓ,
OECD,
Initiative:
the
Corporate
Development
2,
Commitment
HIPC
Jonathan
Country
(2003),
Architecture,
Country
Finance
Poor
No.
Millennium
D.C.,
Report
September
Flows
(2002),
Paris.
Ministers
True
ÒFrom
1,
Working
Paper
Declaration
Countries
ofPoliciesÓ,
Economics,
Aid
ÒCan
September.
Leape,
Social
Centre
Debts?Ó,
Ministers
Declaration
to166,
and
2003,
HIPC
KeyPromise
Delivering
(2003),
Africa:
the
Paper,
False
Issues
Meet
Centre
Debt
Martin,
Responsibility
for
World
ofPress
toof
for
8th
for
on
Declaration
November.
Ministerial
InitiativeÓ,
Prague,
and
Geneva,
Recommendations
Copenhagen,
Elbadawi,
Development:
Seminar,
ÐÐÐÐÐ
Overhang
Iqbal
Countries,
Washington
EURODAD
Creditors
Poorest
Payments
Consultative
Private
Government
Report,
Greenhill,
HIPCÓ,
Gunter,
in
prepared
Group
44
From:
FONDAD,
All
Assessing
Recommendations
(2002b),
(2001a),
(2001b),
(2000a),
(2000b),
,(1999),
and
Meeting
HIPC
New
Heavily-Indebted
September.
June.
Benno
(2002),
CountriesÓ,
Capital
Kampala.
Bernhard
February
mimeo,
and
for
Ibrahim
R.
Should
IMF
D.C.
of
Romilly
Economics
Debt
ofthe
Meeting,
December.
Declaration
Towards
Economic
Kanbur
Monetary
Group.
ÒImplementing
Ndulu
Ghana
Tanzania
Uganda
in
ÒFinancing
5th
ÒThe
ÒImplementing
Institute,
of2004,
February.
ÒGoing
Flows
Relief
Goand
(2003),
Intergovernmental
Trinidad
HIPC
HIPC
the
and
Need
of
and
(eds.),
Further
Brussels,
(1999),
aLondon,
(2002),
Foundation,
Alan
Growth
LinkagesÓ,
in
Initiative:
1st
Business
the
(2001),
-Elena
www.fondad.org
Ministerial
Njuguna
Poor
toand
of
Mainland
ÒAchieving
Myths
Poverty
International
2nd
HIPC
Gelb
Extra
Reinforce
the
External
with
ÒAid
March.
HIPC
June.
the
in
Private
Sisti
CountriesÓ,
February.
Tobago,
HIPC
ÒReport
and
3rd
HIPC
Ministerial
(2002),
PlanÓ,
NdungÕu
Sub-Saharan
HIPC
Mile:
Debt
Flows:
November,
London,
Reduction
IIÓ,
TanzaniaÓ,
The
(2003),
Group
Reality
Meeting,
HIPC
Ministerial
Long-Term
Initiative:
Finance
Capital
the
Initiative:
Reduction
February.
Key
Declaration
Paper
How
on
ÒFinancing
(1997),
Monetary
Budgetary,
Ministerial
September.
Discussion
of
Enhanced
the
HIPC
and
Report
ÒReal
Beyond
MeetingÓ,
AfricaÓ,
24,
Maputo,
for
Dar
Flows
Study
Debt
Why
Debates
MeetingÓ,
ÒDebt
for
XVI
Conclusions
AERC
Low-Income
Fund,
Es
Progress
Conclusions
to
ofTechnical
HIPC
AfricaÕs
Balance
Survey
Sustainability
the
of
Salaam.
Paper
Meeting,
In:
6th
4th
Policy
Foreign
IIÓ,
Z.Report
HIPC
2001
ofand on
Matthew
Humphreys,
Debt
Ishac
IMF
18.
Operations
AssistanceÓ,
ShocksÓ,
the
Towards
Review
Reduction
IMF,
IMF/World
Report
Bank,
ImplementationÓ,
World
Achievement
by
Washington
ÐÐÐÐÐ
Poor
From:
FONDAD,
the
(2003a),
Medium
Difficulties
Washington
Countries
Diwan
(2003c),
(2003d),
(2003e),
(2003f),
IMF/World
(2003b),
Bank,
(2002a),
(2002b),
HIPC
Department,
Fiscal
prepared
Staffs
aMartin
February
Policy
Forward-Looking
and
Bank
Charles
D.C.
and
TermÓ,
D.C.,
Debt
(eds.),
IMF/World
ofExternal
Finance
IMF,
Growth
Affairs
of
45Relief
ÒUpdate
the
ÒFund
ÒRole
ÒDebt
ÒAssessing
ÒReview
(2003a),
ÒPoverty
ÒThe
Long-Term
ÒExternal
(HIPCs)Ó,
D.C.
Development
D.C.,
by
Bank
August
Report
the
April
2004,
ofthe
Washington
Policy
and
Subsidization
Subsidisation
IMF,
Dealing
Enhanced
Low-Income
Department,
Assistance
of
Sustainability
,Facility
World
Debt
July.
and
March
Bank,
John
on
of
Staffs
Washington
-15.
www.fondad.org
8.Myths
the
Washington
ÒHIPC
Reduction
prepared
Development
Debt
Paper
StrategyÓ,
SustainabilityÓ,
the
Policy
Statistics
Bank
Underwood
with
and
Fund
15.
Washington
D.C.,
HIPC
Financing
ÐKey
Initiative
of
SustainabilityÓ,
Management
prepared
and
AfricaÓ,
for
Review
Staff
and
IMF,
of
in
Development
the
by
Features
D.C.,
Strategy
Initiative
August
D.C.,
D.C.
Reality
Post-Conflict
Countries
Low-Income
in
the
IMF,
Debt
and
Policy
IMF
(1989),
Guide
Washington
AnalysesÓ,
Department,
Low-Income
D.C.,
ofin
September
Staffs
byIn:
Review
ÐMay.
and
IMF/World
Crisis,
18.
PRGF
Policy
of
Status
Papers
the
for
Development
Heavily
Ishrat
World
August
and
ÒThe
Facing
the
Countries
of
Paper
Staffs
Compilers
and
Department,
D.C.,
Paper
Review
the
World
Emergency
Countries
Development
Poverty
of
Ð12.
the
External
IMF,
Bank,
Husain
HIPC
Progress
7.
Indebted
Exogenous
ImplementationÓ,
prepared
IMF
of
August
prepared
Bank,
and
Departments,
over
the
and
and
Ðinand
Users,
World
(PRSP)
of
March
Johnson,
presented
Initiative,
Martin,
We
FlowsÓ,
Relief
CenturyÓ,
Tanzania,
by
Government
London.
Income
HIPCs:
Department
Solution
Commission
ÐÐÐÐÐ
HIPC
International,
Mistry,
Oxfam
Development
CountriesÓ,
46
From:
FONDAD,
theII:
Need
Debt
Assessing
Bank
21.
15.
(2002b),
(2002c),
(1999a),
(1999b),
,and
International
HIPC
Approach:
World
International,
Countries:
How
aMatthew
mimeo,
Relief
Alison
Percy
The
February
Alison
to
Key
atDebt
HIPC
the
June.
Alison
Cleo
Randa
and
External
to
for
Debt
Report,
AfricaÕs
Hague.
Goals:
Oxfam
Bank
Issues
the
Gilman
Protect
(1994),
IMF,
ÒReview
III
ÒAnalysing
Development
ÒFinancing
ÒChanging
International,
Rose-Innes
International
Africa
Johnson
London,
(2000),
(2002a),
Alami
Relief
Main
Commonwealth
Relief
Johnson
HIPC
2004,
and
Perception
Briefing
?Ó,
Failing
IMF/World
FinancingÓ,
Chapter
for
(2003),
Rutihinda
Debt
FindingsÓ,
IMF,
London,
(2001),
Against
Ministerial
Multilateral
Initiative:
ofHIPCsÓ,
Paper
and
-March.
www.fondad.org
ÒThe
International,
ÒDebt
the
(2003),
Myths
the
Poverty
AfricaÕs
(2003),
ProblemsÓ,
IMF/World
Finance
Juan-Carlos
Juan
to
Paper,
2,Development
ÒThe
Fiscal
for
HIPC
and
Bank,
Poverty
Secretariat
Sustainability
February.
London,
ÒLong-Term
ÔShocksÕÓ,
Deliver
Relief
Memorial
North-South
and
Carlos
Debt
Paper
North-South
ÒKey
RealityÓ,
IMF
Reduction
IndicatorsÓ,
ÒPrivate
Meeting,
London,
The
International,
Development
Debt:
Reality
Washington
Burden
Bank,
Paper
Relief
and
Reduction
and
March.
Analytical
for
Key
prepared
London,
Aguilar
Lecture,
Debt
Report
of
An
the
Seminar
Poverty
Low
September.
HIPC
Washington
of
Capital
In:
Institute,
for
October.
inMillennium
International,
the
Emerging
Institute,
of
DebtÓ,
Sustainability
Income
D.C.,
July.
HIPCsÓ,
in
Report
Canadian
(2003),
UN
(2000),
Debates
Strategy
by
Private
to
UK,
Bank
Issues
onthe
Reduction:
March.
the
Economic
Flows
February.
Paper
HIPC
Crisis?,
D.C.,
21st
of
to
Ottawa.
Staffs
Debt
ÒA
ÒImplementing
May.
Capital
for
Paper
DFID
to
Lasting
Low-
Do
for
Matthew
Pattillo,
Debt
D.C.,
Radelet,
to
Economics,
Account:
2,
Sachs,
April.
CountriesÓ,
Brookings
Serieux,
Meeting,
UNCTAD
Vaugeois,
Paper
Development
World
Appropriate
at
Committee
ÐÐÐÐÐ
FactsheetÓ,
Washington
Zedillo,
Financing
From:
(http://www.un.org/reports/financing/index.html).
FONDAD,
No.and
the August.
and
prepared
Bank
(2003b),
(2003c),
HIPC
Millennium
2,
Jeffrey
(1993),
Country
Martin
February
GrowthÓ,
Steven
Soft
John
mimeo,
Ernesto
Catherine
Sheila
Centre
Institution,
Michel
Meeting,
for
Washington
(2003a),
D.C.
Debt
Brookings
of
Financing:Implementing
Operations
Power
(2002),
Development,
47Relief
D.
Trade
for
the
ÒSupporting
LevelÓ,
ÒThe
(2003),
February.
Herrling
for
(1999),
et
2004,
IMF
Challenge
(2002),
the
UK,
September
A.,
or
Global
Heavily
al.
Global
and
Working
D.C.,
Papers
ÒThe
Collateral
Washington
Commonwealth
Department
Debt
Paper
-Evaluation
www.fondad.org
H.Myths
Challenging
(2001),
Development
ÒNote
(2003),
ÒResolving
Poirson
Enhanced
Development
Sound
United
Account,
June.
Development,
Relief
Indebted
onPaper
prepared
22.onReport
and
Economic
Policies
ÒThe
Damage?Ó,
D.C.
Debt
for
Department,
Nations,
and
International,
the
Reality
02/69,
Foreign
HIPC
Secretariat
Institute
the
Report,
Poor
International
for
L.Initiative
Millennium
Sustainability
Finance,
Monterrey
of Washington
Debt
Activity
Ricci
with
Countries
the
IMF,
New
Aid:
In:
Geneva.
Crisis
Development
World
High-Level
for
Adequate
York,
(2002),
Washington
CGD
HIPC
World
AFebruary.
Consensus
Challenge
No.
PolicymakerÕs
International
Brief,
D.C.,
in
Initiative;
Bank,
ofBank,
Forum
June
1,2002Ó,
IndicatorsÓ,
ÒExternal
Low-Income
and
Panel
28,
Vol.onAGuide
3HIPC
Reduction
Florence
Experience
In
experience
benefits
relationship
poverty
Initiative
1resulted
UgandaÕs
1970
relief
increased
result
deteriorating
borrowing
Historically,
loans,
proportion
1980s
with
From:
48
FONDAD,
Debt
this
Debt
to
the
and
HIPC
Relief
under
of
short-term
chapter,
reduction.
$3.6
February
N.1990s,
of
in
debt
countryÕs
Relief
Strategies:
over
successive
for
indebt
have
of
Debt
Kuteesa
the
between
billion
the
debt
Before
burden
terms
economic
the
concessional
the
HIPC
been
Relief
and
we
sustainability
HIPC
exceeding
2004,
country
credits
stock
The
decades
borrowing
and
highlight
of
Poverty
Initiative,
the
instrumental
and
in
governments
UgandaÕs
Initiative.
additional
trade,
-recovery
www.fondad.org
Rosetti
nominal
1998,
management
HIPC
After
Myths
had
having
because
debt
70 guidelines.
resources,
the
expansionary
been
percent
HIPC
and
Nabbumba
as
terms
and
toand
defaulting
ceased
main
resources
in
year
The
expected.
of
contracting
total
Reality
and
stabilisation
conclude
reducing
rose
countryÕs
arrears
byissues
in
debt
indebt
the
which
from
fiscal
the
from
on
relief,
mid-1990s
relating
by
sustainability
poverty
accumulation
rose
debt
medium
1970s.
$172
it
external
looking
the
policies
programmes.
first
steadily
obligations,
explore
HIPC
million
but
to
The
tolongterm
in atline
received
debt
UgandaÕs
have
asin
and
the
the
and
inahad
notdebt
heavy
the
1 This figure assumed full delivery of HIPC debt relief by all creditors, includ
those
ing
and
Florence
institutions.
Debt
country
international
an
1990s
relief.
bilateral
which
obligations
to
institutions
UgandaÕs
positive.
under
April
Uganda
qualifying
of
reduction.
debt
over
From:
FONDAD,
Table
Paris
¥Year
Commercial
Multilateral
HIPC
Enhanced
Toronto
London
Naples
Lyon
Cologne
IDA-funded
UgandaÕs
the
macroeconomic
non-OECD
arelief
1998
bilateral
only
they
both
1998
1HIPC
Club
HIPC
qualified,
period
terms
has
Unfortunately,
February
UgandaÕs
N.terms
overall
experience
terms
HIPC
donors
Uganda
bilateral
paid
the
and
period,
In
Debt
Kuteesa
is
benefited
debt
to
Initiative
amounting
bilateral
in
(HIPC
Debt
community
commercial
total,
of
2000
not
multilateral
first
April
1992
1995
creditors
funds
direct
Relief
1989
(HIPC
Buyback
debt
therefore
was
reform
twenty
2004,
Debt
without
Fund
awith
was
I)
and
new
Paris
owed
the
HIPC
2000,
as
from
position,
in
to
Relief
1998
II)
creditors
their
which
-anegotiations
www.fondad.org
(Uganda)
Rosetti
since
aand
years.
1992
phenomenon
debt
order
the
first
reflection
$1
Myths
who
to
and
having
result
1999
debt
Club
set
respectively.
acreditors.
billion1
relief
multilateral
engaged
HIPC
Experiences
had
buyback
the
proven
up1992-95
to
country
As
and
Nabbumba
relief
creditors
mainly
who
to
of
refused
mid-1980s.
help
Initiative
aEnhanced
Reality
inin
only
Multilateral
on
go
of
both
consequence,
were
the
commitment
inthe
reschedulings
because
Uganda
This
debt
to
through
NPV
49qualify
1992,
had
multilateral
The
initiatives,
the
not
were
creditors.
case
HIPC
countryÕs
initiative
relief
terms
aHowever,
has
speed
commercial
members
repay
until
willing
limited
aby
ofUganda
Initiative
toDebt
been
standard
1994,
for
to
Uganda.
for
with
poverty
its
from
Athe
exemplary
be
ofthe
apart
Fund,
lending
broadly
debt
Uganda
tohas
impact
number
was
70late
debt
which
delivered
debt
the
the
offer
six-year
The
apercent
first
relief
in
from
into
Bretton
precursor
was
buy-back
on
of
record
debt
time.Woods
grantedin 1992
received
budget
approximately
2further
Prior
strategy
Plan
over
specifically
the
integral
within
donor
and
budgets
From:
FONDAD,
1998/99
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
HIPC
40%
35%
30%
25%
Poverty
Figure
Scale)
(inPoverty
HIPC
government
PAF
millions
(PEAP),
the
Savings
to1the
funds,
HIPC
support
inHIPC
expenditures
for
Debt
February
1999/00
Expenditures
substantial
past
the
for
medium
part
Reduction
the
budget
Debt
PAF
HIPC
poverty
which
to
and
Relief
(Left-hand
of
4formed
$90
of
Savings
over
medium
years,
term.
poverty
expenditure
Relief
2000/01
dollars
the
government
2004,
million
Initiative,
that
guides
the
and
cash
eradication,
governmentÕs
are
(Righthand
term.
As
the
and
accounting
-is
www.fondad.org
period.
eradication
Poverty
2001/02
Scale)
and
aPoverty
shown
Myths
savings,
per
policy
funded
way
revenues.
areas
percentage
annum
Uganda
of2002/03
in
and
This
Reduction:
formulation
by
for
the
protecting
Action
budget.
Figure
are
Expenditures
averaging
Reality
inhad
programmes
HIPC
figure
almost
Poverty
The
shown
debt
of2003/04
adopted
Fund
savings,
1,
The
trends
total
UgandaÕs
has
relief
while
in
a$60
and
funds
Eradication
(PAF)
PAF
quarter
from
Figure
risen
2004/05
budget)
amillion
public
in
isgoing
ÒearmarkedÓ
the
and
national
budgetary
as
HIPC
Experience
a2.
now
increase
ofspending
is
an
virtual
per
savings
theannum
to
set
Action
total
to
cuts,
fund
in rise
Figure
(in
Florence
The
channeled
most
rural
Over
increased
percent.
water,
environmental
delivery
as
Table
Millennium
¥overlap
targets:
initiated
enrolment
gender
retention,
schooling
From:
FONDAD,
1997/98
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
0100
Other
2005/06
2004/05
(Proj.)
2003/04
(Budget)
Rural
Accountability
Agricultural
Safe
Primary
Universal
(Pre-PAF)
Education:
aresources
billions
critical
the
result
Water
roads,
2.
HIPC
(Land
Roads
2Health
rural
gap
between
February
1998/99
Expenditures
N.
past
There
improved
These
toand
by
in
from
still
Primary
Development
at
the
Debt
Kuteesa
of
Reform,
ofthe
the
9safe
roads,
UgandaÕs
1997,
Extension
saved
areas
four
spending.
percent.
have
increased
achievements
2.6
quality
Sanitation
Care
Ugandian
the
needs
Relief
1999/00
PAF
2004,
water
significantly
primary
Education
years,
has
million
and
from
such
also
gender,
Poverty
Adult
allowed
onand
Universal
toGoals
led
-of
www.fondad.org
Rosetti
and
Yearly
Throughout
2000/01
Poverty
shillings)
HIPC
as
been
budgets
be
Myths
annual
level
education
Literacy,
toimproved.
Exports
primary
sanitation,
HIV/AIDS,
are
Eradication
Uganda
(MDGs)
debt
substantial
an
7.3
growth
and
Nabbumba
and
in
Primary
has
2001/02
Reduction
expenditures
for
upsurge
million
relief
the
line
Reality
topoverty
education,
poverty
since
been
and
Restocking,
for
justice,
increase
1990s,
and
with
Action
Education
increased
2002/03
51pupils
in
closed.
that
health
increases
there
Areas
agriculture.
declined
gross
reduction,
the
onPlan
social
were
primary
law
the
is
LGDP)
education
expenditures
fulfilment
in
However,
policy,
primary
access
aand
purposively
budget
in
and
2002.
service
noticeably,
substantial
health
spending
order,
astopupil
MDG The
for
shown
ofand
postprimary
care,
was
the
oninon
20
From:
FONDAD,
Table
Indicator
Poverty
Gini
Demographic
Total
Population
Macroeconomic
GDP
Government
Budget
Education
Gross
Net
Ratio
Pupil-Teacher
Adult
Health
Infant
Children
Immunisation
Malaria
HIV/AIDS
Fertility
Water
Rural
Urban
Households
Sources:
1995,
Water,
Appleton,S.,
LevelÓ,
52
2002.
HIPC
($Coefficient
per
Primary
2HIPC
Population
Primary
of
Literacy
and
access
2000-2001;
billion)
Deficit
and
Mortality
Lands
February
Development
and
Level
capita
(proportional
1999;
Debt
girls
Underweight
Prevalence
Uganda,
1991
and
Rate
Sanitation
Debt
Growth
Expenditure
Revenue
Nutrition
with
Inequality
indicators
Enrolment
(DPT3)
to
and
L.
Relief
(%)
Indicators
Literacy
Enrolment
Ratio
IMF
1995
($)
(%
enrolment
Rate
(children
Relief
5.5
safe
latrine
Song,
2004,
(inequality)
(millions)
(per
Ministry
Environment,
56(%
Rate
GDP,
and
285
Indicators,
2000
6.2
65:1
(%)
and
44World
(weight-for-age)
drinking
ofexcl.
(%)
1,000
morbidity)
ÒIncome
-Poverty
www.fondad.org
(%)
280
(%
35per
(millions)
54
61
14
orMyths
Target
GDP)
to
49:1
GDP)
84
of10Bank,
2.5
62
48
6.1
toilet
16.7
boys
live
grants)
77
woman)
Health,
Finance,
2017
0.364
11.1
2005
68
60
water
water(%)
Uganda
and
and
2.9
517.2
Uganda,
Year
100
Reduction:
19.3
85
births)
(%)
2005
(%)
Human
ÒPRSP
Reality
11.3
2.3
0.366
21
2003
2005
6.9
(%)
6.4
95
25
Uganda
Poverty
22.2
25.5
79.9
Uganda
2.6
62
1991Ð2000
99
37
6.9
39
ÐDevelopment
11.5
122
0.384
80
Progress
6.8
22.5
53
82.3
UgandaÕs
Demographic
816588.4
2005
PRSP,
Status
2005
March
inReports,
at
Experience
68ImplementationÓ,
the
2005
and
2002;
Household
Health
2001,
Ministry
Survey,
2003;IMF,
of
From:
FONDAD,
Florence
regularly
however,
remains
reducing
¥immunisation
percent
As
social
has
where
groups
created
to
of
share
in
3from
system.
The
supposed
the
ratio
debt
analyses
exports
completion
HIV/AIDS:
Roads:
Water
Health:
Poverty:
HIPC
2000.
seen
address
public
1997-98
gone
observed
Medium-Term
combined
foreseeable
40of
within-year
rescheduling.
HIPC
the
service
and
February
and
apercent
in
above,
Long-Term
ratio
N.spending.
remains
infant,
the
to
below
(DSA)
has
improving
major
majority
the
incidence
2000,
regions
these
to
Debt
point
Kuteesa
prevalence
Sanitation:
the
enable
share
rates.
rise
budget
debt
increased
35
over
mid-1990s
the
delivery
150
conducted
Relief
in
challenge.
productive
Expenditure
Sustainability
future,
a2004,
child
but
new
percent
budget
to
inthe
Expenditure
relief
1997
problematic
Poverty
of
also
Uganda
percent,
However,
and
the
The
spent
almost
fell
has
poverty.
challenges
the
-as
www.fondad.org
rates
and
18Rosetti
from
access
to
health
and
persist.
government
cuts
Myths
to
since
given
inrural
dramatically
poor
on
to
months
522002
There
maternal
Action
sectors,
measured
200
6.5
its
Framework
2001-02,
thus
results
have
20
PAF,
arising
remain
percent
Inequalities
Framework
and
area.
status
risen
derive
to
percent.
Nabbumba
road
percent
impact.
soisUganda
delivering
showed
since
fallen
water
Fund
which
Reality
as
is
still
mortality
particularly
on
by
ofnetwork
again
and
from
inthe
of
their
and
to
committed
from
asignificantly
two
during
in
However,
are
ahas
Calculations
53rise
considerably
2001.
the
enhance
protect
under
sustainable
continuing
too
the
1997-98
to
between
debt
Enhanced
improved
56
livelihood
being
risen
total
being
Ugandan
little
rates
38
newly
cash-management
2001-2002.
Sanitation,
percent
HIPC
intoPAF
sustainability
percent
less
agriculture,
the
re-oriented
from
exit
UgandaÕs
maintained
to
socioeconomic
increase
Iand
NPV
HIPC
nationally
populations
progress
improved
poverty
expenditures
debt
made
from
60
investment
and
indebt-toexports
and
18
from
increasing
percent
in
1992
percent
II
path
by14the
hence
debtto-
2002.
focus
was
the
infor
to 35
2a minimum
UgandaÕsgrant Nationalelement
DebtofStrategy
78 percent,
stipulates
and/orthathaveallequivalent
new borrowings
concessionality
must haveto
Ministry
end
percent
higher
HIPC
It
unsustainability
macroeconomic
emphasis
spending.
First,
due
Enhanced
UgandaÕs
at
reflecting
Second,
financing
payments
Analysis.
completion
primarily
on
to
billion
Third,
under
commercial
OECD
leading
the
of
54
From:
FONDAD,
IDAHIPC
5should
deficit
$1,007
highly
increase
the
lending.
of
to
debt
I.HIPC
percent,
bilateral
the
2003
than
the
not
total
atstock.
as
to
Debt
February
ofHIPC
is
debt-to-exports
HIPC
export
were
beDebt
Rather,
million
in
Uganda
from
concessional
reduction
terms
afall
the
point,
at
all
creditors
arrears
Finance,
suggest
UgandaÕs
being
from
noted
fall
the
debt
Relief
management:
the
decision
not
end
Enhanced
the
Initiative,
creditors
in2004,
earnings
As
Relief
levels
of
macroeconomic
has
$3.2
government
placed
there
but
fully
and
of
stock.
from
global
multilateral
accumulation,
at
that
trade
and
Planning
NPV
to
28
borrowed
June
who
the
although
billion
end
point,
-terms,2
www.fondad.org
the
of
enhance
are
percent.
HIPC
incorporated
Poverty
this
debt-to-exports
on
ratio.
for
refused
have
Myths
inflation
deteriorated
commodity
actual
2003.
June
the
as
outset
efficiency
four
isbeen
the
decision
and
ratio
the
$1
at
had
debt
framework
these
they
2003,
and
This
currently
private
development
Reduction:
main
year
value
billion
the
which
Economic
three-year
been
that
willing
unwilling
Reality
has
is
remains
prices.
have
ratio
in
new
time
1992
arrears
reasons
ending
point,
not
rather
for
turned
assumed.
has
since
sector
the
level
and
since
borrowings,
led
pursuing
of
debt
Development
ais
to
contributed
UgandaÕs
rapid
at
For
Debt
institutions,
result
average
2002-03
estimates
balance
the
Enhanced
to
amounted
risen
fifty
than
explaining
out
deliver
prior
an
development
reaching
buyback
example,
In
extend
Sustainability
nominal
rise
average
to
aExperience
volume
particular,
further,
percentage
of
major
toto
fiscal
value
was
be
of
which
HIPC
debt
atHIPC
in
poor
for
and
relief,
toaccessing
$726
the
at
projected
7debt
level
of
exports,
have
the
and
of
new
were
to
relief
non-
percent
strategy
the
torise
public
rise
million,
stock
$4.2
points
been
307inin
Florence
Fourth,
terms.
55
points
Other
creditors
Aand
payment
have
far.
Uganda
savings.
debt
continue
deficit
policy
minimising
However,
helping
future.
that
Errors
countries
prevailing
been
PV
additional
inequalities
Second,
of
international
on
community
by
reducing
From:
institutions.
FONDAD,
number
UgandaÕs
percent
debt-to-exports
the
Uganda
giving
some
been
This
sustainability
it
corrected
given
unforeseen
HIPC
Given
since
has
reforms
made
non-participation
low
of
in
First,
was
Uganda
February
N.more
have
of
to
the
UgandaÕs
have
successful,
amounts
accessing
of
can
concessional,
their
been
adopted
the
shocks
lower
relatively
relief
Debt
Kuteesa
global
debt
creditors
be
the
in
prevailing
HIPC
international
and
this
outright
debt
help
been
highly
medium
that
achieve
Uganda
the
for
has
aid
forced
first
Relief
and
challenges
debts
global
to
2004,
completion.
to
unforeseen
future
ainterest
calculation
subsequent
ratio.
not
relief
reduce
in
and
willing
in
expand
the
help
reduced
almost
three-pronged
the
be
have
although
concessional;
term;
has
country
more
the
rejected
in
to
the
and
-received
www.fondad.org
Rosetti
market
Initiative
commodity
extended
aform
economy.
improve
of
borrowings
Myths
full,
pay
been
There
would
UgandaÕs
decline
taken
future:
and
community
maintain
relief
rates
relate
to
aand
the
non-participation.
over
quarter
to
countries.
number
interest
participate
one
diversify
unduly
of
and
Nabbumba
participation
plus
implementing
is
all
also
concessionality
Uganda
access
to
its
have
HIPC
prices,
to
grants,
offrom
to
is
$20
strategy
ensuring
have
therefore
future
Reality
reducing
debt
Uganda
the
compensation.
needs
enable
debt
of
help
almost
the
currently
of
penalised
increased
million
debt
rates,
to
the
had
relief
creditors.
55rather
this
export
sustainability
Moreover,
multilateral
fact
which
sustainability
to
debt
inthem
court,
tofor
all
HIPC
relief
their
twenty
the
aof
ease
equal
in
yearÕs
do
rectify
IDA
that
in
strong
it
burden
onthan
maintaining
new
growth-enhancing
production,
by
means
Third,
ofthe
the
countryÕs
more
debt
tosuing
recompense
exports
expected,
lending
To
appeal,
virtue
to
subsequent
Further
IDA
percentage
not
burden-sharing
borrowings
arrive
present
HIPC
date,
in
relief
Uganda
they
case
these
financial
loans,
development
the
lending
all
it
in
indicators.
initiative.
relief
of
valued
isas
and
fiscal
the
have
at
for
international
four
thus
value
so
the
initiative.
have
thus
only
the
athe
impact
cases
fact
at
result
same
the
4 Challenges
Key
Initiative;
between
level;
need
Macroeconomic
reduction
run
expenditure
macroeconomic
expenditures
be
to
rate
private
integrating
shift
project
the
deficit
sustainable
budget
given
56
loans.
From:
FONDAD,
ÔneutralisedÕ
enable
HIPC
challenges
unsustainability
there
efficiency
toHIPC
hurts
from
as
the
expenditures
fiscal
reduce
sector
spending
should
Debt
February
debt
byDebt
is
inflation
fiduciary
export
project
the
funded
donor
levels.
for
adelivering
have
Relief
policies
stability,
relief,
toRelief
decentralisation
UgandaÕs
trade-off
investment.
of
also
slow
the
by
funded
2004,
abeto
production,
projects
budget
byand
amacroeconomic
to
enable
Conversely,
can
Future
addressed
of
implementation
issues
donor
stronger
budget
rather
can
-remain
www.fondad.org
UgandaÕs
fiscal
stability
by
also
Poverty
between
on
allocations
Myths
contribute
This
into
donor
Uganda
associated
aid,
the
support,
be
than
under
while
now
deficit.
exchange
and
and
other.
trade-off
the
mitigated
Reduction:
current
strong
on
loans
and
impact,
to
in
and
Reality
ofthe
capacity
the
control.
high
budget
macroeconomic
and
slowly
directly
growth.
thus
inrate
pay
with
This
and
growth
one
debt
interest
expenditures.
form
the
which
can
ifreform;
so
reducing
grants,
UgandaÕs
budget
hand,
is
bring
atof
Aor
more
medium
despite
However,
be
astohigher
in
because
stronger
local
needs
partially
to
new
poverty
budget
and
rates
its
impacts
aid
the
support;
and
allow
inefficient
Experience
term
concessional
the
government
to
debt
is
tensions
in
large
interest
Aincreasing
exchange
discourage
lower
are:
HIPC
the
sectors
of
avoided
back
and
donorfunded
aidfinanced
short
fiscal
thetoby
rates
to
4Lessons
57
Southern
Mothae
The
was
marked
However,
debt
its
pressure
turn
Notwithstanding
Initiative,
objective
42
problems
point
This
depth
It
effectiveness
chapter
thinking
on
Also,
HIPC
From:
FONDAD,
HIPCs,
is
the
initial
that
impact
relief
of
begs
Initiative
clearly
of
against
in
HIPC
aMaruping
Initiative
from
the
is
February
Africa
total
it
prompted
in
debt
on
recognition
ofDebt
the
onwhich
revisiting
reactions
was
soon
would
millennium.
it
the
Eastern
restoring
which
debt
demonstrates
question
relief,
this
of
break
has
a2004,
the
first
will
Relief
became
HIPC
comprehensive
not
IMF
culminated
further
toand
not
34
background
improvements
and
with
reinforce
of
not
only
and
are
countries
to
relief
the
poverty
been
external
-of
www.fondad.org
apparent
the
the
ensure
be
Myths
past
World
African.
how
Initiative.
improvements
beawidely
that
able
advent
in
raised
fairly
to
and
panacea
piece-meal
would
it
and
and
Bank-led
the
debt
that
aÒwe
that
in
to
further
lasting
the
into
The
held
Reality
ofreached
concerted
significant
the
speedily
arenÕt
atslow
be
sustainability
the
concerns
The
for
the
persistence
various
acould
less
Enhanced
view
reviews
enhance
re-enhanced
external
InitiativeÕs
and
impact
aim
attaining
HIPC
outthan
and
the
be
that
programme
inflexible,
isofbrought
about
high-level
Initiative
enhancements
ofthe
fully
HIPC
the
on
toexpected.
debt
of
the
among
debt
provoke
either
speed
the
HIPC
external
completion
woods
Enhanced
delivery
achieve
that
relief.
to
sustainability.
but
the
fora
Initiative.
inadditional
and
bear
long-term
Public
yetÓ.
atworldÕs
1996
also
its
debt
that
of that
the this
education;
environmental
external
(MDGs),1
addressing
broadly,
resources
1financial
explored.
Debt
Since
mainly
attempted
improved
standard
Naples
Historically,
lack
outside
anon-payment
declined
creditors
debtor
Another
been
fixing
the
of
burdens.
dates
lending
Prior
58
From:
FONDAD,
The
number
more
Lessons
restructuring
Relief
of
the
MDGs
its
would
to
HIPC
OECD
(1994);
countries
of
legal
the
historical
recently
to
February
IParis
debt
terms;
of
to
limited
The
the
should
resources
inception,
to
have
seek
gender
will
long-term
Initiative
the
from
Debt
Measures
countries
ClubÕs
of
non-OECD
be
avoid
financing
address
Paris
HIPC
sustainability
reorganisation
Paris
enforceability
Lyon
debt
bound
opted
HIPCs.
to2004,
discuss
Houston
Club
Eastern
Relief
beInitiative,
concerned.
eligibility
acquired
inequality;
process,
deterring
address
membership.
setback
Club
seen
in
(1996);
Club
service
post-HIPC
Up
the
external
countries
by
for
debtsÕ
and
chaired
ofand
-addition
www.fondad.org
other
to
(1990);
the
contends
for
Paris
arrangements
litigation,
Myths
development.
Other
but
extreme
the
to
blocked
and
to
ClubÕs
cutoff
creditors
Southern
and
or
what
terms,
of
child
national
by
debt
adequate
often
multilateral
debt
HIPC
Club,
In
non-compliant
and
the
to
Debt
Toronto
Cologne
its
external
global
the
that
they
spite
poverty
several
problems
some
principles.
adates,
Reality
mortality,
Millennium
sustainability
Initiative
including
equitable
equally
Initiatives
as
French
much
more
Africa
have
maintaining
from
and
In
are:
Paris
partnership
an
(1988);
(1999)
of
commercial
debts
this
to
excluding
pragmatically
eradication;
international
others
informal
suffered
the
advancing
creditors,
they
Treasury,
by
heavy
non-Club
the
Club
among
burden-sharing
maternal
Development
regard,
offering
terms
ClubÕs
In
for
London
are
in
detriment
that
some
debt
bilateral
fixed
and,
creditors
restructuring.
for
Africa
grouping
others:
mainly
new
one
or
critical
has
insistence
creditors,
though
HIPC
must
(1991);
cases,
relief
universal
health;
development
more
successively
accords.
debts
addressing
cutoff
options
source
Goals
from
of
benot
debt
ofnew
principle
theof
has
from
HIV/AIDS;
for
onprimary
The
by 2015.
Mothae
directly
external
has
(often
grants
multilateral
Debt
dealt
significantly
problems
exposure.
exposure
reschedules
alongside
buy-backs,
the
Current
included
targeting
through
Initiative
bedeviled
debt
basis.
modus
Assessment
The
deeper,
and
spending
After
From:
FONDAD,
included
commercial
chair
Paris
concerted
objectives
to
restructuring
relief
with
operandi
completion
HIPC
Maruping
also
to
The
ensure
Debt
concerted
wider
February
writing
debt
of
would
in
aimed
repurchase
Club,
varies
On
market-based
Club.
ClubÕs
lower
the
mostly
which
has
question
of
Debt
co-funded
principal.
the
from
the
ainstrument.
Relief
problems
benefited
Paris
in
HIPC
and
release
debts.
case-by-case
normally
attempted
adopted
of
at592004,
latter
the
overall
and
Relief
off
IDAÕs
by
would
Naples,
providing
all
point,
Latin
efforts
the
faster
reducing
under
London
debtor
Measures:
sustainable
Club.
is:
their
some
creditors
bywww.fondad.org
New
Enhanced
ofinHIPCsÕ
Debt
have
It
instruments,
seek
-sufficient?
American
African
chair
framework
has
some
the
Lyon
to
debt
financial
Myths
other
handsomely
concessional
also
from
Itclaims,
Club
country,
sustainability-linked
poverty.
Reduction
been
basis,
to
address
this
London
has
bilateral
the
The
and
relief;
provides
meet
all
concerned,
HIPC
debt
and
ways,
countries.
is
thresholds
commercial
in
sought
been
restructuring
Enhanced
Cologne
ofalso
the
creditors,
resources
Reality
Club,
depending
such
the
Initiative
levels
discounted
the
onbank
and
adequate?
tofinancing
participated
donors)
official
ainformal.
burden-sharing
issue
to
aon
as
HIPC
promote
Debt
which
variety
terms
case-by-case
The
HIPC
of
be
remains
debts,
with
debt
anmore
for
onwere
Initiative.
external
the
ofService
core
that
external
successfully
process,
Initiative
have
equitable
Was
has
category.
the
conversions
inclusiveness
levels
economic
increased
Its
of
Enhanced
has
comprehensive
precarious.
external
the
to
incomposition
has
degree
highest
refinancing
been
Facility
not
clause
debt
achieve
ameliorating
basis.
of
provided
bilateral
which
another
By
burdensharing
growth
Similar
HIPC
external
social
ofand
ratios
debt
ofthat
This
only
bonds,
tohas
2 partial
Forum,
have
Review
international
In
Mexico.
post-HIPC
contributions
it
development.2
debt,
and
There
consultation
fact
reduction
core-HIPC
athis
relief
targets
that
HIPCs.
raised,
as
jeopardise
The
attention
Initiative.
broader
eligibility
in
greater
However,
Eastern
rather
60
From:
FONDAD,
HIPC
other
helps
attainment
the
Lessons
improved
Initiative
above-mentioned
been
that
limited
have
macroeconomic
has
HIPC
Finance
February
meetings
has
The
timeframe
slow
has
but
participation
link
and
February
words,
reduce
in
expressed
status,
resources,
been
external
expenditure,
Debt
solution
become
from
also
overall
the
from
Debt
remained
have
Noteworthy
indicators,
spite
Southern
and
aid
of
consultation.
between
Conference
It
of
MinistersÕ
high-level
Sustainability
also
credibility
the
20,
held
post-completion
external
HIPCs
been
remains
Eastern
Relief
the
has
accountability.
serious
not
effective
through
2004,
because
ofand
to
effect
significant
2000,
at
and
has
concerns,
inbrought
Enhanced
increased
their
rather
high.
been
debt
these
Africa
inwww.fondad.org
the
other
domestic
-among
London
asocial
front-loading
inadequate
and
onrelief
debt
the
hurdles
use
Myths
Perspectives
Lilongwe,
recognition
concern,
debt
heavy
has
matched
spending
This
results
of
steps
Financing
slow,
indicate
Southern
international
design
these
of
HIPC
burdens
Analysis
been
the
however,
about
over
relief
the
policies,
problem.
improvements
and
point
debt
public
has
baggage
floating
towards
and
forward,
while
by
Initiative.
Initiative
attention
however,
that
on
are
in
Reality
Malawi
the
and
of
constrained
by
both
real
poverty
that
Africa
for
is
has
and
the
of
delivering
expressed
debt
(DSA),
need
the
last
monitoring,
In
the
of
high
not
the
including
accessing
interim
completion
Development
been
unlocks
constrain
and
ground.
experience
the
isin
fora
Initiative.
addition,
rigid
enhanced
lowering
with
has
risk
not
few
yet
potential
being
expectations
reduction.
one
in
partly
timely
HIPC
too
the
such
been
the
detract
atThis
years,
synonymous
Africa
the
of
conditionalities
debt
sufficient
example.
aid
superficial.
paid
good
relief
Enhanced
process
Commonwealth
and
poverty
Initiative
failed
prospects
of
points,
limited
left
as
delivery
action,
from
held
for
relief;
positive
In
could
thresholds
thehave
and
in
to
linkages
agovernance
spite
out
result
for
Further
in
as
poverty
objectives
is
Commonwealth
the
with
HIPC
and
asstill
Monterrey,
far
of
for
flexibility
toawell
been
March
of
HIPC
to
the
of
debt
asthe
only
ofHIPCand
2002
views
HIPC
3lower
eligible
4to The
Inasfact,
percentage
high
than
HIPCs
as 75%
the
projected
ranged
IMFshare
for
(April
exports
from
Malawi,
in 2002)
exports
63%inasfor
indicated
2000-2001,
atfor
Uganda;
1999.
threethat
67%
raising
main16
forproducts
out
Zambia;
questions
of 24for
40%
HIPCs
about
the
forexperienced
four
Tanzania;
the MEFMI o
realism
Mothae
fprojections.
urgently
some
sub-region.
This
Experiences
Initially
(MEFMI),
After
that
the
into
exogenous
of
Uganda
deterioration
Completion
are
However,
drought
reduction
dampened
relative
Zambia,
aThe
and
From:
FONDAD,
review
trade,
Financial
application
four
Uganda,
still
situation
realistic
non-OECD
includes
aAngolaÕs
recent
HIPC
Maruping
and
long-term
has
later
much
February
required
have
remaining
they
both
by
to
ofsix
shocks,
given
pending,
efforts.
Tanzania
been
points
Debt
Ideally,
of
Tanzania,
initial
the
World
as
creditors
the
Management
been
and
cannot
in
have
followed
of
approach
Eastern
612004,
of
their
particularly
problems
for
HIPC
Relief
the
sustainable
market
these
debt
difficult
KenyaÕs
such
for
identified
Bank
traditional
MEFMI
owing
been
For
had
projections
Uganda.4
debt
eleven
be
Initiative.
Malawi
undiversified
the
relief.
and
as
by
Zambia,
countries
-that
www.fondad.org
isMyths
and
reached
considered
prices
recently
Institute
countries
largely
in
relief
external
adverse
two
floods
awould
Southern
issue
member
IMF
the
real
and
debt
adversely
asand
other
Added
relief
of
the
evaluations,
HIPC
mining
for
should
HIPCs.
Zambia.
to
disaster-stricken
that
clearly
What
problem
of
realm.
weather
her
lead
countries
of
debt
eligible
to
prospects
Reality
African
narrow-based
cases
governance
years
tois
inter-HIPC
completion
Eastern
mechanisms
have
key
threatens
affected
sector.
tothat,
be
were
Asaccelerated
They
signals
needed
for
and
exports.
(Malawi
2000-01
flowing
permanently
Countries
for
ofofdeteriorating
it
sustainable
have
non-compliance
the
and
remain
January
considerations.
Export
debt
the
was
HIPC
point.
by
to
islike
aexport
HIPCs
Southern
and
been
were
from
reverse
aglaring
Macroeconomic
established
relief.
debt
vulnerable
significant
more
rescheduling.
Zambia)
shortfalls
debt
2004,
exited
further
considerable
inthrough
all
sector.3
severe
relief
urgent
the
Africa
poverty
need
relief
creditors.
terms
fromfor
onlyto for
alongside
assistance
financing
completion
resort
Angola,
treated
considered
fully
exports.
important
constitute
poverty
Goals.
current
It
to,
spending.
be
from
international
more
Proposed
As
is
leads
recognising
and
for
with
further
HIPC
62
From:
FONDAD,
one
is
addressed,
the
still
Lessons
aInitiative.
social
post-conflict
as
accepting
poverty
resources
or
efficiently.
the
implemented
flexible
of
to
HIPC
toFebruary
Awould
far
foregoing
exacerbating
which
as
in
approach.
affected
improvements.
The
poverty-reduction
utmost
HIPC
in
debt
Initiative
emergency
would
domestic
for
The
(ODA).
point.
ineligible
to
aconditionality
half,
as
from
Debt
asmall
the
eradication
countryÕs
expect,
isthat
be
short
possible,
risk
including
development
Reinforcement
learning
sustainability
the
application
only
importance
significant
Eastern
Relief
just
sustainable
consistent
by
review
There
2004,
Further
Also,
and,
reconstruction
fact
public
fraction
and
aid
would
armed
to
tend
the
resources
emerging
for
These
also,
situation
medium-term
costs
process
that
date
-are
www.fondad.org
under
increase
the
demonstrates,
or
and
already
Myths
delays
to
debt
HIPC
and
be
conflict.
financing
ofSouthern
deficit
that
development
three
increased
of
with
circumstances
Measures
enhancements
HIPC
suggest
could
worsen
once
due
freed
of
and
current
HIPC
external
financing
relief
from
what
regarding
and
the
exogenous
inpave
strained
to
however
and
the
poverty
will
areas
traditional
eligibility
debt
seems
and
Reality
obtaining
debt
armed
the
HIPC
Other
should
that
poverty
2015
amount
Africa
official
circumstances,
so
the
not
financing
channeled
financing,
way
that
favourable
sustainability,
HIPCs
sustainability
could
far.
warrants
debt
imminent
Initiative
how
reduction.
incorporated
there
overall
conflict,
Millennium
shocks
of
extra-HIPC
international
necessarily
berequire
for
and
reduction.
countries
to
the
This
debt
relief,
actually
increased
development
quickly
indicators,
ais
efficiency
provide
requirements
into
need
re-enhanced
requisite
fiscal
close
under
the
ample
isfurther
relief
price
has
be
While
pressure
Development
national
because
while
povertyreducing
to
into
be
experiences
build
need
reenhanced
in,
ataof
been
monitoring,
will
the
and
community
debt
room
sustainability.
measures
macroeconomic
of
emerging
HIPC
panacea
external
oil
to
used
up,
only
relief
for
tocut
it
andIIis
thus
are
that
Mothae
innovations:
relief,
Burden
burden-sharing
negotiation
broadly,
the
warranted.
requirements
additional
Initiative
dialogue
arrangements.
restructuring
Aabout
litigation
existing
by
publicising
should
Speed
Considering
providing
be
in
Goals,
These
development
absorptive
The
HIPCs
relief
short
From:
FONDAD,
way
HIPCs
achieved
support
HIPC
Paris
same
formula
aeach
of
measures
has
and
HIPC
Maruping
Sharing
be
and
and
more
February
Initiative
inter-low-income
goes
among
assisting
soft
in
Club
continued.
Formula
overall
important
long-term
Bilateral
debt
by
should
of
the
capacities
Debt
post-completion
problems
case
non-compliant
the
through
financing,
for
HIPC
burden-sharing
could
orderly
for
all
In
mechanisms
facilities
the
and
could
cutoff
creditors
acceleration
should
632004,
relief.
human
computing
Relief
this
they
will
ensuring
creditors.
be
for
debt
attainment
Overall
also
HIPCs
isdevised.
re-enhanced
implications
risks
beultimately
of
debt
legal
dates
regard,
lose
Debt
costs
be
for
not
relief
-which
www.fondad.org
improved
non-OECDs
be
and
need
with
could
synchronised
Myths
country
cancellations
creditors,
maximum
debt
of
HIPC
legally
intensified
adequate
process
litigation.
Relief
and
point
should
of
This
through
of
would
exogenous
international
to
Alegal
should
bethe
delays
assistance
relief
and
funding,
Funding
soft
front-loading
byimpact.
be
for
obtain.
and
debt
could
extended
binding
be
for
take
Reality
systematically
funding
examined.
expertise
2015
instituting
facility
as
be
the
inter-HIPC
re-examined
in
with
tosustainability.
relief.
and
debt
Meanwhile,
shocks
beyond
abe
speeded
into
speed
delivering
Millennium
be
actual
Indeterrent
to
orview
widened
achieved
and
parallel
ofaccount
proposals
restructuring.
provided
post-conflict
enforceable.
These
to
should
of
on
and
To
the
replenished,
up.
quantum
or,
legally
discourage
future
of
the
deepen
wherever
the
formula
addressing
minimum
to
HIPC
through
would
against
debt
Partly,
Development
higher
the
more
be
countriesÕ
to
HIPCs,
provide
for
practice
created,
debt
the
of
unmitigated
debt
binding
relief,
debt
bring
ofthe
HIPC
HIPCs.
debt
concerted
to
litigation,
this
relief,
debt
the
relief,
becould
of orused
eligibility
to
therefore
would
experiences,
calculate
Export
imports
of
For
use
together
point
retroactively
forecasts).
top-up
This
and
methodology
scenarios
In
focus
indicators.
the
It
exogenous
be
deteriorating
industrial
costs
Similar
ratio.
terms
revenues
trade.
performance.
64
From:
FONDAD,
beHIPC
this
export
broad
would
addressed
Lessons
event
related
offshore
pre-decision
this
transparent.
would
re-examined.
be
countries,
on
of
HIPC
earnings
debt
For
These
regard,
(e.g.
considerations
February
set
suggested
with
terms,
the
Initiative
be
aid
trade
in
ofDebt
be
PV
products),
would
shocks
contribute
countries
instance,
from
ratios,
supplies
The
relief
using
Experience
of
different
significant
systematically
aside
on
debt-to-exports
export
external
include
disbursement
in
This
critical
more
together
terms
interest
and
a2004,
it
could
results
suffice.
these
turn
Eastern
Relief
point
this
For
could
case-by-case
realistic
is
Contingency
in
is
methodology
realistic
for
protectionism
including
earnings.
emanate
of
and
minimum
current
effects
which
global
are
especially
this
proposed
be
methodology
towards
proposals
sector
ways
food
countries,
with
the
shows
be
trade,
-could
www.fondad.org
could
to
and
impact
discounted
raw
key
Myths
catered
delays,
respect
period
see
tend
that
built
and
actual
forecasts
from
economic
Southern
materials,
required
forecasts.
and
that
of
also
determinants
related
then
making
protection
provisions
basis.
to
when
how
and
from
health
point
the
global
to
constrain
important
debt
future
the
all
into
adjust
there
can
going
the
for.
etc.
be
could
figures
be
else
reduce
Reality
with
they
HIPCs
purely
topping-up
external
explored
slow-down,
affect
Africa
benchmarks
service-to-exports
foreign
still
used
and
to
dampening
the
related
External
economic
especially
is
For
back
topping-up,
export
bein
expenditures
do
the
and
meticulous
for
external
economic
of
Initiative.
still
(outturn
toexogenous
based
reach
post-decision
be
government
export
to
need
subsidies
budget
view
additional
exchange
determine
debt
sector.
for
imports,
applied
revenue
the
more
of
factors
slow-down,
adverse
and
an
ongrowth
decision
to
the
offor
sustainability
the
market
data
opportunity
instead
decision
this
revenue
projections,
historical
objective
analysis
increasingly
the
shocks
on
PV
The
the
reserves
effects
losses
in
budget
capital
minimum
that
funding
used
ratios.
essential
improved
debt-torevenue
usual
developed
access,
and
amount
production
point,
ofare
should
point.
toheavy
postcompletion
of
from
ofto
goods
inthat
toneed
Mothae
reliance
taxes,
bulk
It
objective
achieving
target
relation
Domestic
implicate
Finally,
sustainability.
sustainability
on
balance
is
Long-Term
Several
considered
unsustainable
attain
Sovereign
transparently,
preventive
adequate
building
retention
given
HIPCs.
additional
debt
Financing
ODA
should
concessional
relief,
From:
FONDAD,
iswould
athe
ofHIPC
matter
management
necessary
to
Maruping
such
the
fiscus.
international
If
betheir
sheet
national,
in
February
byat
to
debt
it
funding
sustainable
allocating
from
fiscal
that
Post-Completion
debt
of
this
any
restricted
be
toof
control
grant
PV
Debt
HIPCs
as
appropriately
is
well-trained
arrested
least
debt
domestic
ratio
should
management
assist
levels
gap
terms.
value-added
merely
it
essential
analyses
Countries
concern
has
leading
would
652004,
to
Including
capacity
in
Relief
sustainability
to
resources
and
should
regional
above
accumulation
explore
to
of
HIPCs
maintained
ofThe
relevant
part
beand
in
of
development
debt
Ôcrowd
todeveloping
restoring
be
public
budget
total
calling
-to
www.fondad.org
addressed,
would
preventing
indebtedness,
the
grant
bereversed.
that
are
approach.
managed
of
and
excess
Myths
adjusted
both
aPoint
management
staff.
tax
the
and
could
relieved
comprehensive,
HIPC
outÕ
annual
public
urged
debt.
regional
closely
non-HIPCs
revenues.
debt
reflect
financing,
and
orneeds
possibility
domestic
for
international
should
and
external
of
Debt
countries
goals
competently,
In
debt
poverty
besales
preferably
total
domestic
which
sustainability
to
Mushrooming
full
HIPCs
That
sustainable
Reality
(domestic
this
provided
Positive
from
Sustainability
capacity
related
the
adopt
while
organisations
relief
not
to
are
astax
and
attention.
would
debt
public
does
from
regard,
reduction
assuming
be
HIPC
true
well.
exceed
inprovided
of
not
meticulous
and
budget
aexternal
ensuring
measures
functions
for
net
increased.
general
shifting
sustainability
not
risk-based
slipping
efficiently
call
and
funds.
picture
domestic
being
financing
external
debt.
consideration
the
capacity
resource
annual
external)
necessarily
leads
emphasising
that
revenues.
for
spending,
engaged
debt
that
compromised.
strengthening
as
onthe
The
could
and
ofgrants,
back
providing
intolevels
Net
debt
indirect
tariffs,
sovereign
latter
in
efforts
and
the
building
flows
HIPC
fiscal
decline
debt
be
into
in
new
toburden
debt
then
could
toin
would
for
toofbethe
in
avoid
relapse.
would
Creditors
sustainability-linked
In
costs,
monitoring
funds.
channeling
sectors,
The
beyond
This,
debtor
thereby
attracting
Although
the
amount
measures
and
manner
experiencing
HIPCs.
for
debt
2line
Over
are
pursued
developing
66
From:
FONDAD,
Broader
this
Lessons
terms)
aim
required
topping-up
athe
cancellations).
problem,
in
and
aThese
need
together
number
HIPC
risks
Additional
sustainable
countries
should
(e.g.
net
way,
would
paving
HIPC
the
at
February
Any
particularly
the
need
above
and
National
tofuture.
that
and
new
foreign
the
countries
from
Debt
re-build-up
exceptions
they
and
HIPC
adevelopment
pre
proposals
Initiative.
of
take
borrowers
be
to
itsharing
debt
with
the
of
mix
measures
national,
would
public
Eastern
Relief
returns
to
exhaustively
be
and
would
2004,
would
debt
Initiative
total
place
levels,
way
investment.
of
and
into
avoid
realistic
restore
devised
This
post-completion
and
external
keep
in
debt
ofand
relief
for
may
be
International
-and
www.fondad.org
ofMyths
jointly
stimulate
debt
toonly
for
agreed
the
financing,
However,
regional
international
information
post-HIPC
is
worthwhile
the
external
thus
accessing
moratoria
have
re-enhance
private
their
to
Southern
debt-financed
export
will
relief,
most
onand
could
sovereign
explored.
rule
borrowing
enhance
should
social
causing
higher
aand
aReality
international
release
pressing
if
limited
sector
would
debts
serious
be
sector.
debt
all
ofinternational
in
point
this
and
Development
Africa
ondevelopment
the
seek
provided
priorities
and
cost
credit
capital
avenues
aIn
over
ceilings
the
re-building
better-than-current
pay-off
need
within
relapse
only
truly
would
HIPC
options
scale.
activities,
particular,
accelerate
for
shocks
ways
consideration
implications
uses
time,
tosolve
aratings,
countries
Initiative,
asto
creditworthiness,
markets
to
additional
ofthat
sustainable
small
bepartners.
(for
of
into
and
alevels
increase
thus
enforcing
all
justified
borrowed
reward
up
productive
the
for
this
both
through
HIPC
fraction
innovative
can
would
and
down
causing
that
ofby
frontloading
postconflict
persisting
there
be
amounts
for
status.
the
levels.
HIPC
the
assist
are
both
and
ofa
Mothae
It
National
HIPCs
ensuring
calls
development
risk-based
management
In
countries,
poverty
course
on
to
shocks.
participatory,
base
Similarly,
with
Developing
growth.
credit
Primary
into
additional
capacity
and
should
financial
sector
policies
informal
e.g.
stringent
To
enabling
environment
From:
FONDAD,
isstability
addition,
the
broaden
ensure
encourage
attract
ashould
deeper,
through
reasonable
themselves
for
HIPC
Maruping
on
development
fair
and
be
players.
reduction
At
Mobilising
and
February
long-term
should
to
sector,
political,
them
necessary
growing
strengthened
crises
orapproach
of
need
the
equity
development
higher
Debt
financing.
be
share
secondary
ward-off
should
HIPCs
more
small
the
government-assisted
entire
of
toRelief
export
same
pro-poor
broadened
quality
financial
672004,
to
be
Monitoring
toand
will
the
and
targeted
provision
make
for
financing
active
debt
and,
foster
domestic
reformed
and
be
anticipate
to
structural
time,
macroeconomic,
public
the
financial
have
overall
base
more
social
domestic
stable
created.
effective
Therefore,
the
diversification
of
financing.
to
-medium
www.fondad.org
sustainability.
indeed,
and
sector
and
need
Myths
sustainable
this
public
reduce
sectoral
ato
monitoring
and
stable
private
of
assets
environmentally
savings
for
more
the
pro-poor
stable
external
development.
for
enterprises
micro-finance
that,
to
economic
financial
enhance
sector.
crisis.
Carefully
and
all
is
the
use
tax
expenditure
the
collateral
aimportant
make
Governance
government
and
environmental
important
capital
policies
institutional
Reality
comprehensive
other
will
public
low-risk
beyond
of
collection
frequency
ofFinancial
growth
programmes.
finance
liabilities
of
them
the
Already,
any
growth
capital
make
markets
calculated
low-income
competitive
and
They
and
competence,
flows
HIPC
role
new
more
friendly.
at
and
for
revenues
needs
to
and
bail-outs
them
integrate
and
should
private
and
lower
official
should
be
enable
financing
guarantees.
debt
to
there
flows
the
reforms,
resilient
should
low-cost
institutional
sector
enables
and
and
investment
isand
improved.
to
available
impact
play
developing
purpose
costs
regulatory
relief,
integrated
critical.
export
the
beare
and
maintain
economic
sector
efficiency
for
develop
surveillance
the
cautiously
inare
and
improved,
well-timed
focusing
tax
sources
of
growing
to
financial
andprivate
of
sectors
as
an
the
entities.
required,
lessof
5market
mobilisation;
NEPADaccess
envisages
debtdiversified
for attracting
relief, ODAfinancing
exports
reforms(fromfromprivate
and capitalprivate
mainly capital
flows (domestic
flows) andresource
sector-led externaland
growth
international
approached
of
framework
bureaucratic
taking
expectations
transparency
Investing
addressing
to
HIV/AIDS
Finally,
ownership
economic
In
Regional
in
symbiosis
integration
systems
African
(NEPAD),5
corporate
payments
The
International
increased
equitable
special
such
68
From:
FONDAD,
trade
achieve
the
Africa.
Lessons
international
asHIPC
liberalisation)
enabling
measures
last
and
UnionÕs
needs
the
February
and
capacity
growth
systems.
should
in
of
and
SADC,
governance
market
trade
capital
health
economic
Very
from
Debt
two
and
standards,
USAÕs
excesses
in
and
infrastructure
malaria
macroeconomic
financial
synergies.
of environment.
that
the
and
decades,
little
harmonisation
New
etc.
liberalisation
Eastern
Relief
beAfrica
absorptive
access
the
2004,
and
building
community
account
put
areas
growth.
policies
Partnership
meet
is
This
and
less
and
would
education
progress
-in
www.fondad.org
institutions.
in
urgently
for
and
regionalisation
There
stimulate
Growth
Myths
global
domestic
of
line
could
developed
liberalisation
place.
is
and
need
capacity.
and
In
should
HIPC
Southern
Aof
efficiency,
that
needed
development-friendly
this
social
is
with
and
human
requirements
is
for
help
Opportunity
partnerships
to
needed.
socio-economic,
exports
Elimination
are
need
and
being
cross-border
improve
trade
Reality
beAfrica
regard,
adopted
AfricaÕs
countries
tomore
resources,
policies,
addressed
international
to
encourage
achieve
accountability,
attempts
made
through
negotiations
should
re-invigorate
effective.
opportunities
funding
regional
Act
isinto
Development
with
of
in important,
to
sound
trade,
(AGOA)
behave
corruption
decisively,
including
exploiting
political
transparent
and
industrialised
achieve
account.
pursued
legal
for
standards
principles,
consolidate
public
that
almost
finance,
and
combating
regional
consistency,
for
not
stronger
and
take
asand
and
benefits
Initiatives
bystalled
part
and
only
legal
and
the
e.g.
countries
of and
Mothae
other
expanded.
banks.
instability
the
contributing
for
to
generous
worth
some
commendable
international
reversing
stable
Bilateral
procedures
channeling
where
innovative
of
and
The
3orderly
It
competently,
institutional
not
just
developing
because
Capacity
assistance.
From:
FONDAD,
Building
predictable
be
export
should
international
attainment
ODA
shocks
natural
HIPC
relapse
donors
because
direct
followed
emulating
accountability
HIPC
Maruping
Trade
global
international
of
February
aid
Initiative
building
These
the
and
diversification,
be
0.7
and
aid
financing
from
Capacity
countries
weak
Debt
ofof
and
conditions.
back
History
export
will
to
efforts
reiterated
efficiently
community
declining
environment.
multilateral
capacity
and
of
percent
up
their
streamline
through
692004,
could
cushioning
in
need
changes
poor
debt
Relief
into
profit
community
the
with
has
appropriately
this
financing
shows
for
has
unsustainability.
of
intention
to
is
arrangements,
debt
should
management.
bewww.fondad.org
Millennium
debt
unsustainability
been
ofshown
concrete
government
-should
the
regard,
be
should
trend
guaranteed.
in
Debt
that
channeled
from
and
Myths
conditionality,
the
management.
its
followed
donors
to
volume
restructuring
found
should
Nordic
not
Management
it
transparently.
and
mitigating
GNPs
of
mitigate
need
be
that
adverse
to
seriously
and
action
while
is
slip
concessional
Development
ODA
built
to
guaranteeing
increase
should
budgets,
and
through
ensure
of
countries
targeted
for
essential
technical
Reality
upinto
They
beinNon-HIPC
developed
the
terms
effects.
In
in
with
the
legal
and
of
superior
aand
international
consider
harmonise
could
increased
athis
recent
financially
including
debt
HIPC
regional
aid
especially
effects
maintained.
truly
concrete
particularly
of
To
Goals,
and
mechanisms
mediation.
to
assistance
external
facilities
regard,
resources
promote
trade,
do
after
low-income
status
countries
manage
tothe
announcements
additional
arresting
this,
aid
of
technical
development
provision
without
untying
Netherlands
action.
completion
and
in
financial
aid
simply
financial
financing
the
more
sovereign
HIPCs
for
human
tends
are
countries
at
need
needs
politically
financing
UNboosting
and
aid
way.
The
should
target
and
totopoint
byand
volatility
for
are
debt
be
The
perpetuate
the
Experiences
debt,
experiences
in
African
(ESAIDARM),
exchange
With
tandem
to
management
In
into
Institute
launch,
especially
have
well.
debt
falling
all
and
support
development
4reach
timeframe.
The
not,
70
From:
FONDAD,
Conclusion
the
introduce
pursuit
Lessons
country
ultimate
aspects
financial
Enhanced
problem,
management.
liabilities
time,
the
not
relief
however,
have
Current
for
HIPC
sub-region.
with
countries,
Initiative
MEFMI
into
for
February
reserves
Macroeconomic
been
ofDebt
HIPCs
dependence.
heightened
and
of
in
from
off
with
culminated
prioritised
HIPC
while
of
the
and
aattained
Eastern
the
objective
HIPC
lately
HIPCs
these
has
the
confined
endeavours
management
asRelief
more
debt
regionÕs
technical
and
Eastern
the
The
to
external
debt
2004,
was
capacity
entire
contributed
area
strengthening
Initiative
tonon-HIPCs
The
inand
sovereign
holistic
broad
management,
pervasiveness
coupled
management
and
the
strengthen
Debt
also
trap.
Capacity
in
project,
and
of
to
remains
-its
www.fondad.org
non-HIPCs
capacity
and
sovereign
Southern
are
in
efforts
Myths
assistance
aneed
objectives,
debt
HIPCs,
partners,
and
prioritised
to
Financial
objectives.
pilot
the
Southern
with
and
geared
has
external
manage
to
alike,
toregion.
Reserves
relief
that
and
building
then
of
capacity
consistent
external
building
risk-based
capacity
but
from
been
mushrooming
put
alike.
project
Africa
and
the
balance
aid
Reality
atAfrica
of
this
addiction.
called
external
Management
have
within
inPost-completion
efforts,
ESAIDARM
international
beneficial
urgency
meagre
in
assets.
management.
assisting
attaining
Management
With
tends
place
In
(MEFMI)
to
objective
ofwith
debt
in
order
improvements,
included
sheet.
1994,
the
approach
aprevent
Eastern
the
unwavering
domestic
external
debt
reasonable
tosound
of
best
management
it
was
Eastern
to
area
in
HIPCs
best
tosuccessfully
the
these
became
link
improved
transformed
These
non-HIPCs
will
practices
1997.
non-HIPCs
HIPCs.
and
to
external
of
practice
macroeconomic
public
foreign
in
point
and
the
not
Southern
external
imperative
efforts
capacity
Since
obtaining
Itbe
Southern
external
in
ashas
HIPCs
inout
from
wean
in
its
debt
of
Mothae
are
Economic
point
monumental
Perhaps
beginning
its
necessarily
including
Chapter
However,
debt
opportunities.
export
reinforce
countries
encouraged
Beyond
should
would
keeping
shifted
progress
The
was
measures
sustainability,
reduction.
low-income
ignored.
their
Poverty
part
which
related
and
Initiative
From:
conclusion.
FONDAD,
still
present,
HIPC
not
maintain
sustainability,
of
countries.
be
development
were
HIPC
Maruping
sector
the
be
itThey
6).
with
for
intended
is
humanity.
civil
February
growth
everything
critical
in
Initiative,
still
inDebt
that,
the
or
and
explored
challenge.
at
to
provision
In
developing
not
the
should
become
lack
achieving
aorganisations,
or
re-enhance
the
keen
attainment
least
is
international
each
the
too
precarious
In
have
mere
result
712004,
remains
given
hopefully
strong
Relief
Poverty
key.
MDGs.
of
to
this
to
same
need
effort.
The
global
beastatistics.
play
to
possible
realises
sufficient
be
tonoted
panacea
thereby
of
the
as
improved
the
Focus
raise
set
countries
1999-2001
ofregard,
Hopefully,
panacea
come
and
spirit,
-meaningful
www.fondad.org
low
the
their
HIPC
pointed
reduction
of
halving
pressure
interest
Myths
position
demands
re-enhanced,
objectives.
that
sustained
tohave
should
HIPC
development
the
into
for
should
its
also
debt
part
and
moderate
it
mobilised
for
dire
and
itplay
international
necessary
out
should
It
momentum
financing
primary
Initiative.
of
and
enhancing
needs
relief,
goal
assistance
exerted
lost
in
decisively
regarding
remains
has
fall
in
all
means
Reality
bethis
world
at
assistance
growth
costs,
this
to
always
form
done
posts
the
woes
not
steam.
inand
to
on
partners
objective
financial
ensure
actual
additional
development
poverty
by
important
amost
poverty
that
respect.
beginning,
be
would
to
their
facing
asexternal
Both
will
and
enthusiasm,
the
pursued
been
development
emphasised
forgotten
There
ensure
well
needs
postcompletion
sector
enduring
suffering
HIPC
need
reinforcement
new
still
economic
developing
by
not
clear
eradication,
of
resources
HIPCs.
asto
is
issue.
options
the
of
millennium
debt
Initiative
that
restoring
to
financing
have
iswhen
poverty
need
not
non-HIPC
and
its
from
that
be
year
not,
debt
goals
Other
ofsustainability.
the
growth
to
The
seeking
to
logical
aand
the
2015
be
and
inthat
large
rekindle
HIPC
(see
HIPCsÕ
ininto
slow
1 The views expressed in this chapter are those of the authors and should not be
5interpreted
AChallenges
Martin
This
understanding
Indebted
summarises
context
status
period,
poverty-reducing
participation,
ahead
HIPCsÕ
governments
debt
Since
the
countries.
members
countriesÕ
Toronto2
From:
72
FONDAD,
chievements
View
international
chapter
sustainability
for
the
HIPC
from
Gilman
of
external
for
the
of
February
Poor
terms.
and
the
1980s,
Ahead:
In
the
debts
Debt
asis
the
assessing
impact
and
tothe
and
of
Countries)
Initiative.
those
key
and
Paris
Date
IMF
intended
debt
creditors
By
Relief
the
expenditures,
there
on
2004,
Wayne
challenges
community
late
features
of
culminates
the
inClub,
concessional
ofthe
and
objectives
outlook
progress
HIPCs.
have
1980s,
-mid-1990s,
www.fondad.org
the
Mitchell1
asin
Initiative
Myths
Initiative
Lastly,
first
International
background
of
been
to
facing
and
facilitating
with
industrial
the
in
as
alleviate
and
ofterms
outlines
various
agreed
its
well
the
there
the
aInitiative
Reality
and
countries
onchapter
summary
implementation.
for
Enhanced
as
in
the
debt
to
was
efforts
the
countries,
Monetary
the
facilitating
reschedule
aprogress
stocks,
of
debt
andthe
during
status
provides
key
achievement
context
general
HIPC
byburden
spells
responsibilities
Fund.
main
members
primarily
(Heavily
made
their
debt
of
Itancreditor
low-income
of
recognition
anthe
out
reviews
challenges
of
tointerim
service,
assessment
of ofso-called
lowincome
date.theof
the
longtermItof
and
2eligible
concessional
The Toronto
debtrescheduling
terms
of up to
wereone-third
granted
with a ofin debt.
reduction
OctoberThe in1988.
the net
Naples Theyterms,
present
provide granted
value
for afrom
(NPV)January
of
31995,
Countries
Martin
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/modify/hipc.htm).
that
Consequently,
Club
eligible
especially
external
repeatedly
combination
structural
terms
creditors
In
development
resolve
relief
and
expenditure
Initiative
countries
of
ratio
was
traditional
first
The
with
Seven
late
provide
countries.
HIPC
From:
FONDAD,
See
September
200
social
established
1996
the
creditors
Initiative.
interested
1999
Initiative
effect
IMF
of
and
time,
(G-7)
HIPC
Gilman
with
tothe
broader,
February
debts.
debt
trade,
Initiative
and
(HIPC)
to
250
280
bythose
resorting
and
impacts
was
Consequently,
Debt
ofthe
finance
persisting
the
prioritisation.
debt
countries.
apercent
continue
1996,
sustainable
World
and
problems
under
burdens
two-thirds
permanent
were
factors,
economic
toDespite
poor
policy
as
parties
in
Relief
InitiativeÓ,
in
The
reduction
relief
IMF
faster,
2004,
Wayne
reduce
the
of
thresholds
1996
Bank,
what
forgiving
sub-Saharan
regime,
was
toof
governance,
Initiative
and
and
to
macroeconomic
for
ofwere
IMF
debt
environment,
-The
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
these
debt
including
reform
enhanced
from
inthe
came
provide
levels.3
NPV
World
and
the
Myths
reduction
ÒModifications
difficulties
and
mechanisms
Enhanced
nature
as
Acrises
rescheduling.
overall
for
multilateral
civil
deeper
targets
lowered
IMF,
low-income
to
two-thirds
efforts,
stated
net
for
programmes,
the
Bank
and
Africa,
marked
73debt
be
civil
new
the
following
aReality
To
present
Washington
than
World
supporting
in
society
into
known
lack
conditionality
policy
HIPC
Executive
debt
loans.
key
external
this
debt-to-revenue
established
asustainability.
the
the
some
in
aunrest,
itrelief
continued
sustainable
150
tofinancial
countries
of
Bank
significant
objective
Initiative
asand
servicing
end,
value
Initiative
NPV
was
aThis
reforms
extensive
the
low-income
perseverance
percent
Naples
deterioration
D.C.,
launched
framework
debt
Boards,
ofto
initially
and
target
the
Heavily
often
(NPV)
under
eligible
to
were
also
with
of
burdens
aGroup
July
terms,2
them,
way
institutions.
launched
of
face
shift
ratio
involved,
consultations
larger
reflected
the
levels
of
aimed
countriesÕ
countries,
Unlike
athe
Indebted
amore
sought
by
ownership,
public
23,
thought.
with
debt-toexport
of
countryÕs
heavy
sometimes
willingness
HIPC
debt.
in
linking
of
original
Paris
to
number
1999,
in
their
the
eligible
tothe
for
aPoor
debt
the
of
range
of
4country
Under is thedeemed
Enhanced sustainable
HIPC Initiative,
if the net thepresent
externalvalue debtofburden
debt does
of a not
poorexceed 1
percent of exports or 250 percent of fiscal revenue. Eligibility for assistance
50
the fiscal window is subject to thresholds for the openness of an economy (expor
under
GDPRoss,
tto-
515 percent.
ratio)Dorisof C.,
30 percent
R. Harmsen and et
foral.,
the Official
revenue effort
Financing (revenue-to-GDP
for Developing ratio)
Countries
of
,World
exports
time.4
Initiative;
creditors;
line
maintaining
improving
1have
The
effectively
payments
countries
influencing
make
it
made.
in
poverty
support
only
HIPCs
Debt
(Figure
demonstrate
granted
adjustment
74
From:
FONDAD,
Key
isdesign
terms
Achievements
with
abenefited
be
relief
Economic
Features
important
were
But
themselves.
HIPC
This
substantial
(or
reduction
is
effective
1).5
by
February
toward
oftoDebt
these
governance,
targeted
while
and
of
three
needed.
adhering
programmes.
250
enabled
earlier
macroeconomic
use
its
these
under
the
benefit
In
the
and
floating
from
of
percent
objectives,
poverty-reducing
architecture
the
capacity
to
Relief
and
2004,
Initiative
countriesÕ
strategies
if
the
Financial
are
contribution
note
Experience
Date
ait
assistance
substantial
resources
contribution
first
to
afaster
broader
stimulating
HIPC
among
half
IMF
-During
www.fondad.org
ofMyths
completion
that
reinforces
and
tostage,
stability,
government
Initiative
and
and
those
times
use
Challenges
Surveys
provides
the
have
recent
future
(PRSPs),
group
released
has
this
was
World
and
more
debt
to
prudently
expenditures.
poorest
of
the
HIPCs
growth,
centred
the
shown
provided
points
poverty
sound
period,
Reality
ofBank
historical
the
resource
Series,
effectively
and
relief.
debtor
arevenues)
level
much
is
countries
from
Ahead:
committed
way
HIPC
that
pursuing
in
policies
provided
were
and
on
whatever
supported
reduction.
broader
the
through
forward
lower
the
of
country
IMF,
its
Initiative
needs
external
Areducing
initiated,
Given
gross
debt
country
atability
world,
View
toin
from
Washington
to
reforms
debt
implemented
aeconomic
to
international
debt
benefit
interim
for
service
needs
given
achieving
that
resource
two
from
debt
In
support
poverty
service
considerations
will
HIPCs
is
relief
tothe
this
stages
enabling
aimed
to
point
relief.
important,
under
relief
payments
receive
D.C.,
tois
context
flows
their
can
by
IMF
and
atinthe
2001.
from
In
to
Martin
debt
(usually
financing
Bank
mechanisms
levels
required
World
country
structural
aimed
provide
commit
completion
full
provided
creditors
the
Expectations
and
Initiative
intended
context
role
traditional
decades,
international
Consequently,
policies
relief
HIPCs
cycle.
sustainable
requires
donors,
sound
essential
From:
FONDAD,
beginning
debt
development
relief
determine
amount
and
Bank
at
to
economic
HIPC
Gilman
of
to
is
This
continues
additional
for
on
February
athat
under
reducing
at
relief
scope.
scope
to
will
achieve
efforts
from
external
providing
(including
and
combined
flow
is
would
adjustment
point
has
the
Debt
from
of
the
assessing
external
provide
is
levels
raised
and
of
reached,
non-Paris
community
the
be
whether
the
debt
been
aof
other.
policies,
creditors/donors
rescheduling
completion
operation
partners
Some
Relief
Paris
the
be
commit
has
significantly
debt
major
both
2004,
Wayne
implementing
poverty.
the
external
multilateral
debt,
Initiative.
debt
over
sufficient
at
relief
by
criticised
additional
second
been
multilateral
facts
debt
policies,
achievements
Enhanced
sustainability
by
For
Club
the
-achievement,
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
relief
Club
to
time.
time
orthis,
are
debtors,
including
Myths
reached,
on
reduction
Executive
full
granting
At
end
by
point
HIPC
are
countries
debt
creditors
stage,
whether
onSecond,
official
comparable
understandably
isthe
Inare
macroeconomic
through
of
for
emphasised
HIPC
external
reduced
and
Naples
institutions
application
including
Initiative
aof
it
75on
assame
the
IMF
development
more
when
athe
not
to
these
is
good
Reality
additional
debt
well,
Initiative.
mechanisms
but
ready
Boards
stock-of-debt
requiring
and
the
under
latter
second
and
bilateral
date
it
essential
terms)
country
atime,
achieving
when
complex
the
terms.
maintaining
debt
relief,
flow
countries
provides
to
one
strengthened
the
on
below
toamong
and
decision
of
high
traditional
exit
and
case,
reforms
Paris
stage,
the
relief
hand,
management.
support
and
rescheduling,
World
banks,
the
traditional
to
assistance
understanding
over
HIPC
undertaking
creditors)
for
First,
that
bilateral
provided
condition
stakeholders
and
results
the
concessional
areach
IMF
the
Club
operation.
following
and
when
Bank
setting
the
from
relief.
solid
debt
point
and
commercial
at
rescheduling
debtors
HIPCs
and
IMF
social
it
creditors
mechanisms
sustainable
creditors
times,
last
and
will
beyond
the
at
It
would
the
builds
basis
donors.
under
World
debt
and
that
Ðparticipate
by
and
the
HIPC
isthe
two
wider
suitable
which
pursue
policies
The
be
the
also
relief
be
other
its
for
theAt in
on
and
From:
FONDAD,
76
Figure
Decision
Either
sustainability
(Country
Initiative
Paris
Or
under
commercial
is
for
========>
sustainability.
Boards
All
and
to
completion
assistance
bring
This
available
First
together
in
debt
present
¥treatment
framework
Country
Paris
Other
Multilateral
Achievements
adequate
not
be
early
the
creditors
commercial)
isStage
service
HIPC
Club
Naples
delivered
the
1bilateral
sufficient
determine
February
country
calculated
Club
value
Enhanced
Point
does
with
cases,
Exit
by
World
debt
data
establishes
(recognising
of
Debt
assistance)
stock-of-debt
creditors
point.
depends
terms
other
provides
on
World
not
(multilateral,
civil
basis).
toeligible
at
institutions
Relief
to
Bank
commit
at
an
2004,
eligibility
HIPC
qualify
aThe
the
and
Date
and
bilateral
reach
the
on
based
interim
Bank-
sustainable
society
and
amount
the
decision
three-year
flow
commercial
-and
www.fondad.org
Initiative
comparable
debt
floating
theMyths
operation
external
IMF
on
debt
and
for
need
PRSP
rescheduling
need
Challenges
relief
alatest
continue
and
for
bilateral,
of
IMF-supported
HIPC
Poverty
falling
and
to
point.
level.
may
for
track
creditors
Flow
debt
Reality
betodue
flexibility
Reduction
Ahead:
Chart
record
sufficient
on(up
provide
Naples
provide
adjustment
A adjustment
of
to View
Strategy
in
good
67toexceptional
terms,
atpercent
from
reach
performance
least
programmes.
Paper
i.e.
the
the
support
reduction
comparable
IMF
rescheduling
(PRSP);
decision
cases).
and
in the
develops
on point.
a net
of
that
From:
FONDAD,
Martin
Figure
Second
determined
completion
reduction
terms.*
comprehensive
broad
¥ÒFloatingÓ
Country
World
Paris
Other
All
Timing
did
HIPC
creditors
participation
1Gilman
Stage
February
Bank
Club
bilateral
multilateral
(Continued)
of
not
establishes
onDebt
at
point)
Completion
completion
and
provides
NPV
qualify
andcontinue
the
poverty
Relief
2004,
IMF
basis
Wayne
decision
andoffor
provide
creditors
apoint
linked
flow
commercial
reduction
Point
-second
www.fondad.org
or
civil
Mitchell
Myths
to
treatment
higher
point
rescheduling
provide
toprovide
interim
society
forand
track
the
strategy
77under
(which
if
creditors
nonretroactive
Reality
(Interim)
needed)
support
record
assistance.
and
interim
are
on
designed
donor
theCologne
provide
byoriginal
triggers
within
PRSP.
implementing
debt
community.
HIPCs
bythe
Terms
debt
relief
toHIPC
governments,
(i.e.,
framework
reaching
relief
(90Initiative)
atthe
percent
those
their
onpolicies
the
ofcomparable
with
countries
adiscretion.
floating
debt
is tied t
oatAll
reduction
structural
under
to
debt
¥this
as least
the
determined
relief
assistance.
the
creditors
groups
adoption
one
strategy,
original
adjustment.
provided
full
of
bycreditors
ofthe
provide
year
aHIPC
including
complete
between
sustainability
ofthe
For
Initiative),
the
provide
retroactive
assistance
decision
implementation
macroeconomic
PRSP. equal
target.
the
and
HIPCs
determined
reduction
timing
completion
stabilisation
This
of of
(those
adebt
comprehensive
at
(in
the
countries
the
points
NPV
relief
completion
decision
policies
terms)
counts
isthat
poverty
provided
onpoint;
point
and
did
toward
their
qualify
iswith
interim
claims
tiedno
NPV
¥treatment
*options,
involved.
further
Paris
Other
Multilateral
Recognising
reduction
policy
Club
bilateral
and
on ensuring
provides
stock
orinstitutions
the
conditionality.
higher
and
need
of broad
stock-of-debt
commercial
debt.*
for
if flexibility
needed)
provide
and equitable
creditors
ondebt
reduction
eligible
inrelief,
participation
exceptional
provide
ondebt.
Cologne
each
at cases.
least
choosing
byterms
all
comparable
(90 percent
from
creditors
a menu of
6 number
2003
point
providing
Third,
heavily
commercial
creditor
lowers
levels
Lower
spending,
2service
Implementation
Since
qualified
decision
Congo
for
data
international
Aand
towards
achieve
poverty.
the
satisfactory
The
programmes.
problems
78
From:
FONDAD,
Guyana
Progress
Achievements
concern
85
completion
Mali
decision
remaining
and
are
countries
debt
October
in
HIPC
HIPC
debt
significantly
percent
indebted
payments
the
macroeconomic
February
and
January
participation
point,
July
available.
(ten)
To
in
adequate
which
for
creditors
service
in
Debt
relief
and
service
March
completion
illustrate,
programme
Nicaragua
point
performance
agreements
Implementation
1999,
assistance
2003.
community.
nine
Update
point
of
goodwill
reached
the
to
Relief
poor
by
2004,
the
2003.6
other
ten.
resources
is
payments
and
countries
Date
payments
2002.
27
most
In
Byhave
below
and
provided
countries.
total
stability,
implementation
have
respectively,
mandatory
HIPCs
net
July
point
-completion
www.fondad.org
more
countries
as
and
ofchosen
by
under
recent
have
The
records
Myths
that
present
at
since
each
by
expected
2003,
Challenges
onJuly
for
than
(of
most
by
had
received
onadopting
HIPCs
the
and
appropriately
paid
being
Some
not
would
participating
adecision
facilitate
in
either
areached
three
eight
recent
have
point
potential
HIPC
value
2003,
Reality
voluntary
their
bringing
to
by
allow
relief
ornon-Paris
the
require
debt
been
Ahead:
provide
other
times
Initiative
of
(the
recently
did
(NPV)
of
aprogrammes
the
point
Democratic
macroeconomic
scope
these
number
for
relief
these
making
growth
not
list
interim
completion
concessional
basis
developing
Athe
creditor
the
country.
terms,
Club
debt
HIPCs
the
have
View
for
HIPCs
experienced
total
level
has
of
ratification
or
committed
progress
and
and
34
which
and
relief.
higher
38
Republic
countries
period)
an
from
onhelp
reached
they
been
HIPCs
had
number
depends
for
Fourth,
of
countries)
IMF-
point
average
countries.
will
the
terms.
debt
account
reached
Benin
these
social
reduce
Making
for
by
have
the
of
IMF
inthe
of
between
onwhich
of
ittocompletion
December
7FONDAD,
Status
Martin
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2003/status/091203.htm).
asupported
Ethiopia,
efforts
Challenges
continuation.7
Some
programme
fiscal
common.
often
participatory
hand,
and
implementation
2004.
capacity
effort
process,
sectoral
the
slower
period.
education,
or
available
prove
though
Eleven
these
Liberia,
unsettled
effective
conditions
maintained
From:
See
satisfactory
more
deteriorating
will
social
countries
IMF
associated
most
Many
to
(Burundi,
HIPC
oftriggers
Gilman
policy
required
than
they
countries
to
Weak
In
February
likely
in
collect
strategies
be
Myanmar
and
ImplementationÓ,
programme
The
implementation
to
transitions
policy
implement
in
of
countries
and
many
performance
need
before
Debt
preparing
envisaged
obstacles
have
budget
make
World
and
Gambia,
reaching
slippages,
PRSPs
the
record
experience
requirement
structural
not
to
cases,
Central
Relief
with
and
may
not
have
implementation
2004,
Wayne
political
acountries
these
fully
stabilise
Bank,
in
execution
has
be
and
determination.
measures
lack
analyse
not
been
Somalia),
of
Guinea,
limited
timely
but
to
yet
from
place
the
constrained
within
on
-African
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
taken
undertake
pre-decision
performance.
risking
primarily
engage
have
reaching
Myths
ÒInitiative
extended
the
completion
varies
most
in
to
IMF,
completion
from
post-conflict
and
in
after
PRSPs
data,
the
reach
and
that
and
longer
institutional
specific
been
the
triggers
continuing
and
Washington
security
reaching
all
Republic,
and
79
macroeconomic
across
past.
security
Zambia
poor
their
the
protracted
would
interruptions
expenditure
interim
by
and
establish
met
Difficulties
the
Reality
stakeholders
institution
than
point
for
Among
point
the
completion
policy
underestimate
sectors
or
decision
costings.
countries
has
are
facilitate
conditions.
the
situations
Heavily
expected,
one-year
insufficient
Comoros,
domestic
conditions
D.C.,
period
triggers
countries
the
reflect
capacity,
and
been
currently
completion
priority
delays
implementation
stability
overruns,
such
former,
human
with
point.
building.
September
to
in
satisfactory
point
Indebted
have
Progress
inCsatisfactory
conflict
programme
many
PRGF
abut
has
as
have
in
Preparing
the
key
need
can
teweak
resource
participatory
objectives
making
finalised
health
information
in
In
establishing
Cameroon,
on
point
generally
dÕIvoire,
factors.
with
being
time
interim
triggers
hampered
move
the
most
Domestic
to
Poor
12,
governance
the
inor
are
be
inof
meeting
and
but
future,
2003,
the
fully
other
Countries
them
and
been
one
could
most Ð
is
8estimates
Finance
The comparability
(GDF)
(on HIPCs)
data (onofisdeveloping
NPV
limited
statistics
bycountries)
thederived
use ofand fromHIPC
different
Global
documents
methodologies
Development
and staff
to account
for debt relief and differences in debt coverage. Debt relief is reflected in th
e GDF
database only when actual debt relief agreements are signed, whereas debt relief
estimates in HIPC country documents are based on the assumption of full creditor
cover
developing
typically
participation
onlyoverstate
public
countries
in the
anddebt
HIPC
cover
publicservice
Initiative.
total
guaranteed
publicFurthermore,
because debt
and
grants
private
whereas
associated
debt
debt.
debtindicators
indicators
GDF
withdebt
HIPCservice
forrelief
forHIPCsdata
were
9accounted
Traditional
for relief
separatelyrefers until
to Naples
2001. terms stock-of-debt operations, involving
a67 Achievements
forward
impediment
protracted
multilateral
Sudan,
outstanding
Impact
Expenditures
participating
other
average
HIPC
HIPCs
weighted
decline
30
low-income
The
that
under
debt
reduction
terms,
countries
80
From:
FONDAD,
percent
Initiative
HIPC
relief
have
forgiveness
developing
are
the
HIPC
aFebruary
on
orquickly
NPV
from
concerted
average
relief
Debt
is
expected
reached
traditional
ain
(Figure
NPV
to
external
in
countries.
Debt
arrears.
of
at
two-thirds
creditors.
projected
60
the
reaching
HIPCs
2005.
reduction.
Stocks,
is
the
toward
percent
committed
to
Relief
and
NPV
over
outstanding
2004,
projected
their
2).9
international
debt-to-exports
decision
to
Date
payments
at
These
low-income
of
have
debt
and
Debt
the
to
reduction
-In
www.fondad.org
InMyths
the
before
decision
anddecline
projected
as
beyond
the
decision
several
completion
reached
relief
Service
to
point
debt-to-GDP
Challenges
arrears,
at
debt
eight
substantially
HIPC
and
countries
July
effort
points,
the
offrom
to
mechanisms
stock
HIPCs,
ratio
their
Reality
point.
point
and
relief
levels
the
countries
128
2003
HIPC
including
point
almost
Ahead:
would
Poverty
ratio
of
overall
for
percent
completion
together
isabout
such
(Table
to
Initiative,
Another
at
are
toand
lower
the
beclose
300
is
the
Athat
asView
levels
arrears
Reducing
debt
settlement
needed
1).8
by
projected
27
additional
$52
Liberia,
percent
decision
with
potential
debt
reached
decision
2005
points.
countries
torepresents
billion
stock
from
comparable
The
debt
towhen
indicators
those
weighted
before
the
Somalia
resolve
to
point
of
their
ofin
The
relief
bilateral
point
most
of
these
IMFNPV
toof
aother
and
Notes:
From:
FONDAD,
Martin
Table
(in
Developing
countries
average
20012
ratio4
NPV
GDP
Debt
19
Figures 15ratio
percent-weighted
of
service-toexports6
1HIPC
2001
167
Gilman
debt-toexports
120
debt-to-
February
Debt
countries
represent
low-income
38
10
Debt
Countries
Non-HIPC
relief3
143Indicators
39
10
and
274
Relief
61
85
2004,
Wayne
HIPC
weighted
completion
275
65
Before
averages)
HIPC
enhanced
50214
-for
www.fondad.org
for
Mitchell
Myths
305
Countries1
Debt
2001
1285
averages.
Developing
indicators
point
and
Debt
for
81Reality
2002
After
Serbia
Countries
indicators
at enhanced
the Montenegro,
and andHIPC
HIPCsrelief
Liberia, Somalia, an
1d HIPC Turkmenistan
countrieshavereferbeentoexcluded
the 27 countries
because ofthatincomplete
had reached
data.the decision point b
2y Developing
the end of countries
July 2003 comprise
under thelow-
enhanced
and middle-income
HIPC Initiative.
countries according to th
3e Debt
Worldstocks
Bank income
are afterclassification.
traditional Paris Club relief before the decision point.
4Congo,
Data
Exportsrefer
dataarerefer
mostly
defined
totoend-June,
end-1998
as the three-year
and end-1999;
2002. averageforexports
the Democratic
of goodsRepublic
and services
of up
5toDatathearedateforspecified.
2005. Since the Democratic Republic of Congo is expected to reach
76relief
Sources:
its
Exports
Average
completion
assumed
Global
are defined
over committed
1998
pointandas
Development
only
1999.
unconditionally
exports
inFinance
2006,
of (GDF),
the NPV
goods isand
World
ofservices
used.
debt
Bankafter
(2003);
in the
enhanced
current
HIPC HIPCyear.docum
country
ents; and staff estimates.
10 The 2003 projections for the eight completion point countries are based on th
eassumption of full creditor participation. This assumption tends to overstate th
eachieved
countries
completion
percent
The
terms
in
82
From:
FONDAD,
Before
100
80
60
40
32
26
65
77
After
relief
bilateral
Figure
(in
NPV
30
20
010
818
22 bringing
Achievements
HIPC
billions
before
of3traditional
traditional
HIPC
2February
inNPV
Initiative
debt
average
relief
points,
2002
Debt
relief
traditional
aofnumber
reduction,
service
NPV
to
Relief
Debt
dollars,
2004,
approximately
After
debt
Date
terms
continues
ofpayments
for-additional
www.fondad.org
relief
stock
them
and
but
the
Myths
Completion
in
(Figure
Challenges
2002
financing
to
27
reduction
to
NPV
for
and
90NPV
their
Decision
provide
3).10
after
percent
HIPCs,
Reality
Point
terms)
completion
assurances
Ahead:
averaged
traditional
substantial
Point
notwithstanding
Countries
of Atotal
Countries
View
more
points.
already
required
relief
savings
from
thanSignificant
obtained
the
60in
Projected
HIPC
delayrelief.
IMF forNPVthese
at end-
2003
riseAnsignificantly
11 exception is afterthe Democratic
the enhanced Republic
decision
of Congo,
point.where
The increase
debt service
is partly
ratiosdue
the
to resumption of debt service payments following the arrears clearance operatio
n, debt-service-to-revenue
the
12
although
expenditures
13
systems
IMF,
Heavily
2002,
Martin
debt
point
multilateral
and
because
for
of
These
20
as
Poverty-reducing
reached
countries
than
service
from
are
amount
reducing
depending
expected
economic
financing
form
From:
FONDAD,
the
The
Country
16.9
percent
previous
allows
HIPCs
also
projected
ÒActions
service
in
about
of(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2002/track/032202.htm).
due
debt
HIPC
Democratic
definition
Gilman
of
that
Indebted
of
percent
the
payments
1998
savings.
new
February
many
recorded
expenditures
to
reform
toDebt
had
is
debt
on
from
authorities
them
interim
service
ratio
$6.1
decision
increase
aid
period.
for
would
reductions
the
creditors
projected
and
their
countries
to
and
already
byservice
increased
to2004,
in
billion
programmes
flows
Relief
rural
Strengthen
Poor
provision
expenditures
in
1999,
Poverty-reducing
staffs
Republic
of
Wayne
inensure
increase
relief,
1998,
ratios
specific
other
2002
poverty-reducing
the
point
in
Countries
fallen
in
and
development.
are
which
to
freeing
-savings
www.fondad.org
include
Mitchell
occur
in
to
all
and
other
(Figure
the
revenue
Myths
the
are
low-income
be
debt
putting
of
the
were
1999
increase
and
the
poverty
situations.
countries
eases
to
is
about
near
Congo
efficiency
before
interim
considerably
inaverage
debt
debt-service-to-GDP.
about
implementing
relief.
and
primary
Tracking
(HIPCs)Ó,
9.9
projected
almost
to
83term
the
4).12
and
expenditures,
into
30
$8.4
the
Reality
had
reducing
percent
service
countries
countries.11
27
$1.0
international
expenditures
place
relief
percent
that
resource
debt-service-to-exports
four
Annual
$11.9
related
vary
not
education
countries
billion
Poverty-reducing
ofbillion
IMF,
to
below
are
been
public
poverty-reducing
Poverty
by
capacity
times
across
their
bylower
expenditures.
fall
billion
debt
Washington
reach
2002
increase
on
Paris
constraint
meanwhile,
inservicing
the
and
to
Similar
that
as
in
track
PRSPs
varies
expenditure
service
2002
countries
support
Reducing
from
during
8the
corresponding
ratios
great
annual
in
basic
Club
percent
have
and
2005.13
in
with
completion
an
spending
across
D.C.,
improvements
most
and
of
Primarily
as
by
2001-2005
increased
poverty
their
in
health
average
such
debt
expenditures.
Public
HIPCs
debt
these
the
management
key
ratio
by
ofcountries
March
The2005.
is
its
asSpending
well
22,
debtSee
asinin
14
Status
15
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2003/status/091203.htm).
Creditor
The
external
NPV
billion
terms,
reached
for
these
suggest
PDR
than
Most
84
From:
FONDAD,
Figure
in
0(in
1999
16
12
Poverty-reducing
Debt
48 the
See
The
Achievements
total
terms.14
Liberia,
in
billions
25HIPC
of
2000
service
countries
IMF
of
first
$33.3
4the
27
inPoverty-Reducing
the
however,
percent
these
February
Participation:
debt
ImplementationÓ,
cost
Decision
2001
and
debt
estimates
Debt
decision
three
In
billion
Somalia,
of
paid
data
additional
World
of
2002
nominal
service
are
or
to
Relief
dollars)
that
2004,
expenditures
the
or
countries
is
$10.6
Date
Point
not
2003
Bank,
is
point.
could
projected
HIPC
available
Sudan,
including
-and
www.fondad.org
Costs,
terms,
relief
associated
yet
billion
costs
Myths
Countries
2004
Expenditures
ÒInitiative
IMF,
Initiative
increase
This
available.15
Challenges
also
or
2005
Commitments
these
over
are
and
Washington
is
Lao
Sudan,
estimate
tohave
estimated
with
concentrated
Reality
time.
PDR
the
$50.0
costs
for
for
protracted
Liberia,
Ahead:
and
the
because
cost
Preliminary
the
Of
does
billion
Heavily
D.C.,
and
represent
External
countries
atA34not
the
of Delivery
$39.4
reliable
Somalia,
HIPC
in
View
September
HIPCs
total
arrears
in
Indebted
include
Sudan.
Debt
about
calculations
relief
2002
from
billion
that
forService
cost
data
and
problems.
NPV
the
12,
which
$51.1
have
the
Poor
in
by
Lao
inmore
for
terms.
IMF
2003,
2002
costs
Countries
2002NPV Ñ
16 members
Martin
reduction.
Multilateral
In
48
creditors
Initiative,
required.
IMF,
Bank/European
for
countries
Development
So
Bilateral
relief.
Most
by
total
committed
that
providing
the
have
terms16
concessionality
Benin
Nicaragua
rescheduling
was
many
went
topping-up
once
From:
FONDAD,
Cologne
NPV
percent
far
Economic
Arab
HIPC
instrumental
ofHIPC
have
agreed
Paris
beyond
the
and
Gilman
terms,
multilateral
the
for
February
African
Monetary
Initiative.
Democratic
have
The
in
Creditors
to
reached
interim
Mali
and
terms
of
costs
Club
the
Debt
representing
Bank
costs
ato
this.
Creditors
Integration
the
delivering
onand
multilateral
total
large
Union
the
number
The
aindicated
at
Naples
generally
Naples
creditors
Relief
entail
Development
(IADB),
interim
agreed
number
in
2004,
Wayne
Fund
attributable
Paris
the
relief
their
Gambia
In HIPC
multilateral
(EIB/EU),
creditors
2002
clearing
Republic
Since
of
addition
decision
flow
reconfirmed
-terms
www.fondad.org
stock-of-debt
Mitchell
to
Club
their
of
countries
completion
costs.
their
more
the
(CABEI)
period.
NPV
and
at
Myths
provided
offered
creditors
participate
September
stock-of-debt
rescheduling
their
Bank
European
which
terms.
relief
for
arrears
of
than
and
have
share
the
intention
to
point.
and
Twenty-three
Congo
85Paris
creditors,
are
In
the
(AfDB),
the
official
going
decision
terms
99over
its
delivered
account
by
points
Reality
October
All
of
accounted
providing
2002,
Democratic
tooperations,
percent
Investment
Central
Many
Naples
reaches
inamounts
participation
HIPC
Paris
beyond
external
for
Club
toand
and
operations
the
bilateral
for
Paris
points.
participate
including
2002,
relief
the
ofthe
more
above
terms,
has
ofthe
Inter-American
American
HIPC
Club
flow
for
relief
$15.2
30agreed
Republic
arrears
tothe
Club
creditors.
involving
the
than
decision
$19.0
multilateral
Initiative
creditors
to
that
degree
reschedulings
The
Cologne
onbillion
these
total
in
creditors
toflow
East
the
creditors
Bank
$3.8
Cologne
inof
early
required
clearance
tobillion,
most
IDA,
countries
of
include
the
debt
African
consider
terms
point,
anhave
billion
Congo
Inof2003.
and
90are
the
are
addition,
relief
the
under
for
percent
or
that
borne
in NPV
17 Although Libya has agreed to participate in the HIPC Initiative it has yet to
establish the legislative framework to facilitate this. Staffs estimate that tra
debt relief, i.e. a stock-of-debt operation on Naples terms, will cost around $9
ditional
million
00
18
IssuesÓ,
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2003/creditor/040803.pdf).
70
steadily
account
billion.
Initiative
relief
write
Mozambique,
of
measured
Consequently,
which
Thirteen
commitments
framework
on
creditor
attributable
In
measures
Based
been
options
Commercial
The
substantially
IDA-Only
about
86
From:
FONDAD,
See
percent.
relief
some
March
Achievements
participation
size
working
would
the
off
they
5on
HIPC
IMF
toinCountries
for
but
to
percent
February
IMF,
improved.
In
after
non-Paris
countries
2003
to
the
of
costs
16
all
by
and
2002
and
have
resolve
Creditors
Debt
reduce
$3.4
September
Nicaragua,
to
not
provide
commercial
countries.17
non-Paris
to
input
with
Washington
claims
delivery
14
the
reduced
World
their
deliver
NPV
for
outstanding
all
this
of
to
Relief
billion
have
2004,
ofDate
Boards
bilateral
the
The
Club
representing
received
this
and
HIPC
terms.
the
claims
relief
Bank,
non-Paris
on
debtors
group
2002
made
as
countryÕs
51
$225
Tanzania,
Club
of
full
-debt
www.fondad.org
27Myths
HIPCs,
bilateral
issue.
relief.
and
D.C.,
aof
non-Paris
In
relief
ÒEnhanced
decision
Libya
commitments
on
have
by
result
HIPC
million
official
loans
debt
the
from
creditors
owed
relief
Challenges
June
reach
HIPCs.
HIPC
April
Club
thereby
and
about
not
Bank
Indebt
agreed
Uganda,
becomes
relief
the
by
2003
reach
creditors
ofthe
creditors
required
some
Reality
bilateral
Club
point
(in
yet
HIPCs
HIPC
8,
bilateral
Twenty-four
and
Board
the
service
21
and
India
benefiting
completion
to
Ahead:
2003,
costs
to
2002
the
under
agreed
HIPCs,
official
and
an
percent
the
Debt
Initiative
countries
deliver
donors
has
fully
discussion
issue
completion
have
from
NPV
announced
Zambia.
Fund
to
obligations
creditors
in
the
already
AReduction
creditors
to
however,
HIPC
View
2002
participate
terms)
indicated
non-Paris
of
to
them
bilateral
Ghana,
point.
once
HIPC
deliver
reviewed
represent
the
further
Ðaccounts
Delivery
debtors.18
from
NPV
staffs
been
Creditor
its
countries
point.
Initiative
relief
has
in
total
Facility
Guyana,
can
byClub
terms,
HIPC
the
HIPC
decision
creditors
explore
another
in
only
have
$3.3
cost
IMF
relief.
for
Participation
the
ofbetofully
to
for
Martin
commercial
outstanding
small
countries
are
creditors
provided
judgments
relationships
Challenges
For
maintaining
poverty
more
both
and
Staffs
for
required
or
respective
Programmes
from
with
could
completion
IMF
to
implementation.
have
The
aassistance.
From:
FONDAD,
performance
been
alleviate
many
the
PRSPs
countries
and
HIPC
made
countries
stressed
the
protracted
also
inof
be
HIPC
Gilman
countries
reduction
discontinued,
World
February
NPV
cases
HIPC
IMF
conditions.
international
back
Initiative
commercial
have
payments
also
should
the
helped
creditors
Ahead
country
that
point
Debt
debt.
macroeconomic
terms,
and
constraints
and
relief.
with
that
which
on
Bank
record
resorted
where
received
prevent
reach
would
interruptions
In
Relief
for
have
triggers.
the
not
track
provided
identify
2004,
Wayne
Although
in
strategies
inis
the
ownership
authorities
and
this
they
are
account
creditors
debtors
the
World
be
Where
leading
excess
Pending
been
IMF
facilitate
HIPCs
international
the
community.
within
Fund
-open
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
litigation
judgments,
sacrificed
experiencing
regard
are
HIPC
interim
completion
facing
Myths
stability,
staff
other
bottlenecks
the
attributed
Although
Bank
Fund
PRGF
staff
to
for
nevertheless
have
of
from
and
tolitigation
Initiative
ain
claims
to
the
all
and
that
as
programmes
have
short
conditions
countries
the
a87have
period
meeting
quality
the
their
not
regularising
implement
In
significant
some
as
however,
well
for
PRSP
eligible
Reality
there
point
decision
required
community.
preparing
difficulties
sought
resumption
principle
aofbeen
remitted
to
period
and
speed.
macroeconomic
non-Paris
means
delays
as
preparation
commercial
and
the
inaare
is
quickly,
in
the
development
have
cause
in
the
to
Staff
working
countries
outstanding
challenge
asocial
of
PRSP
point
ofmet.
had
need
proportion
payments
some
financial
in
and
strong
provide
work
therefore
PRGF
either
of
time
debt
ofby
Club
the
reaching
in
Monitored
design
implementing
the
financial
for
creditors
cases
and
Additionally,
with
status
concern.
meeting
programmes
and
recovery.
creditor
desire
that
the
bilateral
of
Boards
partners
support
lapsed
technical
after
structural
court
the
countries
reach
others
and
ofestablish
debtors
end
thesupport
reports
toof
the
are
In
the
There
see
nine
established
19 The sunseta timeclauselimit
stemsinfromordertheto1996
prevent
Programme
the HIPCof Initiative
Action whichfrom becoming a
could
permanent
be supported
facility by andtheto IMF
encourage
and IDA. HIPCs
ThetoBoards
adoptsubsequently
adjustment programmes
agreed to twoyear
that
20
Stress:
2004
(http://www1.worldbank.org/operations/licus).
lies
countries
contained
Countries
that
reaching
Full
challenge.
debt
is
take
implementation
programmes.
during
lowers
Non
litigation
objectives.
financially
underlying
under
the
commercial
by
Accordingly,
publicity
secondary
HIPC
authorities
expected
88
From:
FONDAD,
extensions
See
also
their
Achievements
need
participation
Fund
when
ahead
face
participation
stocks
longer
Initiative
the
HIPC
World
this
their
Aparticipation
critical
February
decision
to
and
limited
Task
the
qualify
in
Under
conflict-related,
Initiative,
to
market
inof
is
Such
against
the
creditors
Debt
than
develop
period
The
costly,
Bank,
near-term
Bank
the
1998,
sunset
to
Force
HIPCs
of
Initiative.
creditor
Stress
participation
provision
latter
implementation
to
Relief
ensure
World
for
anticipated
interaction
Fund
problems
and
2004,
for
points.20
their
in
staff
ÒWorld
in
is
HIPCs,
Date
2000,
their
undermines
ReportÓ,
clause
are
many
the
to
entry
debt
critical
moral
and
Bank
(LICUS)
debt
diverts
-as
www.fondad.org
that
economic
in
deliver
known
countries
and
reduced
Initiative
Myths
and
countries
PRSPs
of
frustrates
Bank
arising
HIPCs
relief
Given
dealing
takes
before
Task
governance
service
suasion
Challenges
the
to
interim
with
2002.
World
is
litigation
Group
may
as
the
will
reports
and
and
HIPC
reach
remaining
Force
essential
to
adjustment
the
effect.19
by
it
the
from
and
this
be
HIPCs
burden-sharing
with
Reality
Bank,
sustainable
in
overcome
costs
and
is
continue
Work
all
assistance
supports
the
voluntary
relief,
useful
their
World
multilateral
critical
Report
or
their
the
and
Ahead:
date
in
this
creditors
achievement
time
cases
in(b)
Washington
capacity
substantially.
pre-decision
in
particular,
only
sale
Ato
completion
and
Bank
Low-Income
is
in
interim
difficulties
issue.
however,
critical
on
order
the
Aand
nature
in
contact
points
reached.
supporting
levels.
reform
by
approach
(a)
of
View
Low-Income
and
efforts
resources,
principle
the
obstacles
poses
major
HIPC
creditors
tofrom
Encouraging
give
D.C.,
periods
of
the
ofthe
is
semi-annual
under
challenge
ensure
points
creditor
Countries
point
Such
these
debt
The
another
creditors
debt
pursued
complicated
IMF.
extensive
inHIPCs
of
the
September
the
approach
to
support
which
the
HIPCs,
is
in
about
that
due
relief
IMFthe
that
by
Under
tothe
may
their
and
2002,
heavily
21
the
22
Status
23
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2002/status/092302.htm).
Contacts
See
This
latter
IMF
of
primarily
concentrated
ImplementationÓ,
two
and
areWorld
are
limited
reflects
notin
Bank,
Fund
withexports
primary
ÒHeavily
IMF,
members.
Iraq,Washington
commodities
North
in
Indebted
countries
Korea,
D.C.,
such
Poorwith
and
August
as,
Countries
Taiwan
a narrow
coffee,
16,Province
Initiative
2002,
cotton,
resource ofcashews,
ÐChina;andfi
base
and copper. The world price for coffee, the main export crop in five HIPCs, fell
sh,
35bypercent
Other
large commodities
price indeclines:
2001.that
Cotton,
cashews
constitute
the(amain
decline
theexport
primary
in prices
inexport
threeofof
HIPCs,
69atpercent),
least
fell one
byfish
19HIPC
percent.
(21sawperc
andGhana
ent),
24
are copper
not included
and(13Sierra
percent).
in the
Leonecomparison
both reached of 2001
theiroutturns
decisionvs.points
decision
in 2002
pointandprojectio
thus
Martin
ns.
Initiative;21
3official
Review
The
decline
external
countries
at
academics,
better
and
Initiative
An
that
2001,
owing
world
commodities
expected
the
estimated
completion
From:
FONDAD,
Debt
the
IMF
constructive
global
to
decision
(i)
the
mainly
economy
HIPC
Gilman
Sustainability
of
completion
understanding
propose
and
into
February
bilateral
debt
for
Debt
could
principal
toeconomic
many
and
are
World
point
Debt
ofhave
recover
the
to
point,
and
indicators
isSustainability
non-governmental
actions
achieved.
HIPCs
primary
have
declining
Relief
role
Bank
group
recovering
countries
2004,
Wayne
(c)
point.
been
and
slowdown
source
quickly.
the
debt
of
continue
encourage
in
staff
commercial
to
of
-higher
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
commodity
the
NPV
seeking
HIPCs
in
These
Myths
ratios
ensure
HIPCs
commodity
ofof
for
many
causes
review
slowly,
inin
When
the
to
concerns
debt-to-exports
which
and
the
2001,
organisations
whose
89compared
debt
HIPCs
exceeding
that
be
15creditors.
prices,
deterioration
and
in
Reality
debtor
prices;23
the
depressed
out
data
relief
together
the
August
debt
and
nature
prompted
prices
of led
objectives
are
countries
fears
indicators
to
thefrom
200222
to24
(NGOs)
of
and
projections
available
with
HIPC
of
ratios
was
acountries
that
public
the
their
(ii)
key
were
deterioration
aof
threshold
confirmed
lower
toin
recent
significant
some
worsened
export
while
not
take
non-Paris
officials,
call
the
(Table
2001
exports
made
changes
HIPC
including
anare
for
the
ratios
inactive
at
2).24
aofClub
where
From:
FONDAD,
90
Table
with
(in
Percentage
Points
NPV
15
Export-Ratio
Worsened
Benin
Burkina-Faso
Chad
Gambia,
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Honduras
Malawi
Mauritania
(SNicaragua
Senegal
Uganda
9Zambia
Unchanged
Bolivia
Cameroon
Madagascar
Mali
Mozambique
Niger
Rwanda
Tanzania
The
Note:
Dt/Xt)
oCountries
Achievements
Countries
percentage
of
Tom
decomposition
.Ratios
-8
D82
2HIPC
..55
Difference
Debt-to-
44
58
-49
is
February
Updated
=The
-36
.10
Debt
70
..2
and
-1
-41
49
11
(Dt-1/Xt)*(
.the
119
Ratios
.2
Debt
.Effect
.2
75
-31
-18
3-34
Projected
.11
21
.2
57
with
-33
-2
with
588
.2
-47
Principe
.25
-51
-22
.Ratios
37
NPV
6points)
1..2
.-7
Relief
to
NPV
(Numerator)
57
-4
2004,
15
38
59
..2
Improved/
.2
-19
of
.NPV
-25
-27
of
Date
430
.2
of
.2
-11
Effect
9.25
debt
Dthe
at
of
.33
t/Dt-1
-and
www.fondad.org
.Debt-to-Export
12
..2
Myths
their
Debt
debt,
.2
and
Challenges
1of
99
.-(Denominator)
Exports
export
XDecision
and
.Xt/.2
isXt-1)
Reality
45
exports,
effects
Ratios
Ahead:
Pointsat
is
and
A end
View
derived
 is
2001
from
theas
Compared
the
first
IMFdifference operat
1 Includes new borrowing and revisions in the outstanding stock of debt. In the
or.
case of Faso,
Burkina Benin,and Guyana, the higher NPV of debt is largely due to delays in rea
completion
2ching
Insufficient points. information on the NPV of debt was available to make a complete a
ssessment
the NPV debt-to-exports
of ratio. The estimated effect of exports (3rd column) show
s the
in
Sources:
thechange
ratioDecision assuming Pointthedocuments,
NPV of debt andwas
World
as Bank
predicated
and Fundin staff
the Decision
estimates.
Point.
25 The full impact of debt relief on debt stocks is projected at the decision po
for provision at the completion point. However the delivery of debt relief does
int
occurresults
not
This as projected
in an increase
when countriesin debtarelevels
delayed relative
in reaching
to projections
the completion
at thepoint.
decisi
26 respond
point.
on
Point
27
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2001/cpd/cpd.pdf).
Martin
flexibility.
Revisions
reaching
projections
cases
changes
average,
higher
in
characteristics,
and
2001.
of
discussion
factors
The
permanent.
to
countries
approach
September
additional
that
the
other
countryÕs
due
continue
context
From:
FONDAD,
See
To
the
historical
each
structural
export,
current
approach
tocommitted
ConsiderationsÓ,
date,
higher
Thus
economic
HIPC
IMF
Gilman
deterioration
export
exogenous
toto
countryÕs
and
of
February
the
was
toDebt
that
2001
economic
and
discount
assessing
of
to
assistance
their
Burkina
also
were
judgment
framework
bethe
completion
borrowing
countries
endorsed
is
and
commodity
exports,
athe
World
characteristics
have
and
at
data
involved
adeterioration
Relief
debt
raised
atogether
developments.
respective
2004,
Wayne
specific
relative
the
comprehensive
contributing
an
circumstances
Faso
and
yet
available
Bank,
of
debt
on
stock
of
by
operational
or
decision
IMF,
than
with
-as
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
point
the
exchange
debt
dependence
whether
to
with
issustainability
the
Òtopping
Myths
compared
with
ÒThe
situation
roles
reach
Washington
the
at
debt
projected
worsened
programmes
ratios.
IMF
HIPC
compared
of
at
ofassessment
the
point
The
and
Enhanced
only
factor
the
91authorities
ratios
rate
of
their
and
the
have
these
Initiative
framework
upÓ
decision
and
to
type
IMF
Reality
domestic
changes
country
and
debt
World
was
completion
assumptions
other
at
been
D.C.,
awith
determining
completion
and
inestablished.26
economies
ofHIPC
much
in
requires
the
indicators
sustainability
several
commodities
Bank
based
fundamentally
World
PRSPs
point
decision
HIPCs.
HIPCs
are
for
August
that
decision
policies
has
completion
Initiative
greater
nottemporary
Boards
providing
point,
the
on
Bank
but
has
and
also
show
must
that
point.
only
countries.25
These
performance
21,
actual
point
have
flexibility
also
benefited
delays
point
volatility
versus
staffs
contributed
that,
they
atake
on
in
2001,
point
27Ðin
structural
fuller
outlook
This
changed
adebt
or
such
whether
the
Completion
Central
aswill
slightly
produce
account
inbeyond
on
exogenous
well
in
from
In
and
for
ato
some
asthis
29 For
28
Status
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2002/status/092302.htm);
and
Outlook
WP/01/144,
these
See
Lisandro
papers.
IMF
of
progress
forImplementationÓ,
and
IMF,
Debt
Abrego,
World
Washington
inSustainability
improving
Bank, D.C.,
ÒDebt ÒHeavily
IMF,
Relief
theand
Washington
2001.
tracking
Under
Indebted
Resource
This
theofD.C.,
HIPC
subsection
PoorInitiative:
FlowÓ,
poverty-reducing
September
Countries
IMFdraws
Working
23,
Initiative
Context
substantially
and,
public
2002,
Paper
Doris
andÐ Ross
expenditure
on
management
increasing
Maintaining
sufficient
excluding
macroeconomic
challenge
debt
countriesÕ
growth
with
reduction,
The
under
To
adhere
reforms
commodity
performance
Strategy
tasks
challenges,
strategies,
effectiveness
In
public
made
92
From:
FONDAD,
provided
maintain
this
Achievements
level
other
sustainability
and
the
inthe
by
HIPC
and
to
expenditure
totaking
regard,
this
February
them
its
first
Papers
ofDebt
shocks
for
two
responsibility
sound
dependence,
capacity,
the
for
fiscal
terms
but
diversify
Debt
debt
overall.
deepening
and
relief
associated
area
conditions
HIPCs
elements
with
effectiveness
HIPCs
of
this
macroeconomic
(PRSPs)
the
improving
it
to
Relief
Sustainability
that
of
sustainability,
2004,
and
these
under
assistance
which
is
management
Date
provided
however,
depends
new
is
central
including
to
their
They
fundamentally
external
and
ownership
important
not
-fall
www.fondad.org
embark
debt
borrowing.
elements
as
the
and
for
of
they
Myths
tothe
should
governance
anChallenges
production
not
beyond
role
HIPC
insystems,
aunder
is
service
strengthen
toand
ongoing
policies
utilise
new
on
prolonged
repayment
main
the
Beyond
to
only
of
that
update
by
governments
HIPCs
utilise
in
Initiative.29
aReality
borrowing
remain
The
the
economic
use
path
change
providing
vehicles
diagnosing
onresources,
but
and
HIPCs
guarantee
and
the
HIPC
InitiativeÕs
have
and
building
Ahead:
their
of
(i)
growth
ofexport
period
also
capacity,
their
institutions
oncontinue
foreign
HIPC
these
implement
sustainable
the
aInitiative
development
policies,
such
and
for
DSA,
aon
Aresponsibility
and
Poverty
country-specific
Initiative
existing
one-time
of
on
View
countriesÕ
(ii)
their
base
addressing
including
athe
strengthen
aid.
time.28
as
debt
export
path.
scope
tostructural
from
the
well
away
and,
and
should
deals
creditors.
Reduction
improve
progress
debt
sustainability.
stock
debt
Longterm
evolution
and
the
The
as
from
hence,
foreign
these
ÐIMF
only
to
debt
be
on
more
of(iii)
their
the
aid.
of the
a
anddeveloping
World
IMF,
Martin
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/prspgen/2002/eng/091102.htm).
In
capacity,
debt
performance,
adhere
borrowing;
practices
to
On
adequate
support
jeopardising
development
agreement
the
will
effect
borrowing
cumulative
concessional
ensure
capacity
term,
countries
increase
allow
diversification
Looking
obligations.
on
sustainability
financing,
From:
FONDAD,
addition
assure
the
grants.
public
broader
form
Washington
sustainability
beBank,
however,
the
HIPC
Gilman
to
donor/creditor
on
that
ofthe
an
ahead,
February
external
of
in
strengthened
in
sufficient
the
with
to
latter
expenditure
integrating
HIPCsÕ
important
impact
Further
borrowing,
Debt
ÒPoverty
to
macroeconomic
grant
partners.
grants
new
countries
aHIPCs
debt
their
provide
financing
regain
access
and
following
adebt
ensuring
countryÕs
grants
the
IMF
in
D.C.,
external
and
forward-looking
Relief
better
2004,
Wayne
management;
poverty-reduction
financing
acould
undertaking
external
to
ratios
international
support
and
prospects
their
of
enhance
post-HIPC
Reduction
areturns
step
September
side,
The
particularly
would
that
and
management
debt
plans
proportion
from
low-income
-World
www.fondad.org
Mitchell
improvements
key
be
opportunities
debt
financing
Myths
and
recently
forward
of
creditworthiness
debt
significant
are
from
management
principles:
responsibility
on
debt
from
be
the
their
for
ato
Bank
(see
fiscal
servicing
and
world
Strategy
new
sufficiently
substitution
small
particularly
management
and
11,
repay
international
the
framework
93staffs
new
sustainability.
both
community
system
ensuring
of
in
countries
capacity
Box
borrowing
concluded
vulnerable
is
Reality
2002,
and
international
while
borrowing
framework
IDA
this
in
future
bilateral
consistent
for
isthe
1).
over
aPapers
limiting
capacity;
growth
instrategies.
resources
are
countryÕs
important
regard
growth
for
making
aIrrespective
lies
must
and
to
PRSP
concessional
of
short
the
vulnerable.
toshould
productive
obligations.
13th
currently
low-income
community
service
assessing
Ðhelp
with
and
strategies
part
reduce
global
injudgments
and
longer
countries,
Progress
or
This
(see
with
and
following
IDA
term,
community
tailoring
providing
in
repayment
in
aim
avoiding
multilateral
ofthese
export
includes
replenishment
Box
the
markets
their
The
improving
HIPCsÕ
term.
working
ofcountries
to
use
but
would
Over
debt
terms
inabout
without
2).
payments
export
see
best
of
the
reliance
to
debt
ImplementationÓ,
nonconcessional
new
More
the
The
new
help
would
funds
in
an
IMF
longer
and
From:
FONDAD,
Box
Following
the
staffs
technical
strengthen
substantial
among
assistance
continued
order
Recognising
capacity.
currently
between
economic
agencies
improve
complementarities;
and
measures
sustainability
partners,
regularly
provides
framework
progress
also
included
debt.
¥disclosure
institutionalised
by
1expenditure
SM/02/92,
94
(http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/2002/edm/032102.htm).
objective
advantage
while
ensuring
relief
AsAchievements
AStronger
See
HIPCs
1key
World
(iv)
key
part
Strengthening
HIPC
to
Moreover,
IMF
minimising
explore
isFebruary
HIPC
efficiency
measure
strengthen
management;
establish
acould
reports.
to
as
themselves.
that
aof
Bank
assistance
to
evaluating
HIPCs
as
defined
and
March
is
of
not
Debt
debt
providers
good
monitoring
2001
demand
athe
maintaining
part
review
work
acountry
they
to
resource
means
the
World
progress
undermined.
and
proactive
be
comprehensive
prospects,
Relief
management
importance
are
example.
creditors
for
22,
to
allow
2004,
survey
of
the
with
implemented
reach
in
terms
periodic
IMF
by
a(iii)
or
Date
Debt
the
of
aexpected
maintaining
Bank,
2002
providers,
to
potential
level
(ii)
set
the
This
risk
HIPCs
reducing
of
systematic
review
low-income
flows
-and
www.fondad.org
Boards,1
donors,
collaborating
towards
strengthen
mechanisms
the
such
Myths
Management
measures
improve
of
This
PRSP
new
establish
with
should
could
ÒExternal
of
The
capacity
agencies,
of
debt
review
the
for
HIPC
completion
conditions
Challenges
toapproach
to
borrowing
sustainability.
of
future
debt
without
could
and
framework
and
technical
measures
duplication
the
promote
sustainability
presentation
Executive
HIPCs
improvement
management
prepare
long-term
be
the
country
debt
and
take
countries
todone
be
ofReality
cooperation
for
management
assistance
Capacity
ain
be
public
Debt
Òdebt
improve
and
on
followed
regular
the
and
stronger
management
delay:
to
on
HIPCs.
improving
point.
part
both
of
Ahead:
growth
to:
capacity-building
and
as
will
for
assistance
ownership
strengthen
increasing
effectiveness
Management
Directors
multilateral
outstanding
external
distressÓ
and
part
investment
to
inbe
(i)
update
of
byinarising
of
the
support
Domestic
monitoring
The
capacity
of
UgandaÕs
Aup
take
and
information
and
broader
communication
strengthening
the
debtors
HIPCs
the
strengthen
of
View
based
coordination
debt
standards.
their
insurvey
reduce
coordination.
of
their
macroeconomic
debt
periodic
maximum
March
recommended
providers
HIPCsÕ
subsequent
responsibility
in
and,
from
management
debt
credits.
programme.
from
on
institutions
building,
country
development
recent
and
of
HIPCsÓ,
ofseveral
sustainability
also
own
poverty
in
2002
technical
measures;
external
the
sharing
the
management;
debt
creditors
should
overall
HIPC
ADSA
public
particular,
link
ofPRSP
revealed
and
number
DSA
IMF
report
linkages
that
donors,
Staffs
staffs
HIPCs
between
bepublic
for
financing
sois
and
oftois
asare
have
in to
an
From:
FONDAD,
Martin
2001
280
240
200
160
120
80
Decision
New
projections
Box
Over
Sustainability
in
ratios
slightly
future
beyond
recently
Chart
(in
Countries
As
percent
documents.
compared
If
the
2018
lending.
form,
which
It
outlooks
1other
Note:
concessionality.
Rwanda,
subsequently
Benin,
aform
the
is
2IDA
thirteenth
percentages)
NPV
2003
result
the
HIPC
1The
the
is
clear
creditors
Gilman
HIPC
above
lending
the
ten
February
disbursement
Weighted
of
in
Senegal,
point
past
greater
agreed
with
effect
With
very
of
Burkina
2005
Impact
NPV
Debt
levels
debt-to-exports
2010
By
countries
+in
progress
grants.
of
grants,
that
shifting
the
and
grants
two
2018,
the
40
of
close
2007
is
replenishment
increases
Relief
that
compared
on
followed
April
2004,
of
HIPC
than
Average
percent
debt-to-exports
the
Faso,
and
Wayne
years,
also
previously
previous
the
2009
an
the
to
report
up
would
beneficial
IDA
Zambia.
threshold
was
2002.
-likely
www.fondad.org
Increase
programmed
debt-to-exports
that
Chad,
Mitchell
to
average
Myths
2011
IDA
since
with
of
lending
suit
anticipated
ratios
40
for
estimate
qualify
ofBurkina
the
new
projected
lending
projected.
of
Ethiopia,
2013
percent
135
toand
spring
decision
the
impact
inadjust
at
Debt-To-Exports
ratio
IDA
impact
95percent
ratio
toward
atto
inReality
2015
IDA
the
ten
resources
of
financing
toin
higher
these
Faso
2003
of
is
obtain
would
Grants
completion
countries
only
ratio
would
on
Gambia,
2017
the
At
point
partial
their
financial
now
the
projected
HIPCsÕ
reached
tobe
countries
the
ten
levels
112
projected
40
of
average
decision
onGuinea-Bissau,
have
(IDA-13)
in
being
financing
same
to
countries
Ratio
percent.
percent
larger-than-anticipated
grants
HIPCsÕ
projected
is
long-term
point1
offset
its
their
in
support
time,
projected
in
furnished
may
114
many
for
point
completion
may
the
at
can
Debt
of
terms
NPV
has
therefore
almost
percent
that
IDA
the
135
cases.
to
decision
IDA
debt
be
documents
documents.
ofMalawi,
been
donors
HIPCs
furnished
Ten
percent
in
magnified
to
were
disbursements,
resources
debt-toexports
completely
sustainability
average
grant
in
increase
point
Asincrease
projected
under
point
2018,
aand
have
result,
inin
IDA
if155
their
by
indicators
factors
policies
performance,
revenues
extensive
number
support
been
banks
of
96
From:
FONDAD,
this
Achievements
the
inofFebruary
HIPCmentioned
for
framework
and
October
Vienna.
consultations
workshops
that
Debt
and
institutions,
the
exports,
relate
refining
to
Relief
degree
2003
The
2004,
above,
is
Date
around
IMF
envisaged
and
meeting
-prudent
www.fondad.org
ofMyths
have
and
i.e.
this
and
its
its
openness
the
Challenges
been
World
the
vulnerability
new
of
debt
past
world,
in
andthe
quality
held
approach.
early
Bank
Reality
bearing
and
of
multilateral
with
the
with
Ahead:
prospective
Executive
2004.
ofaeconomy,
capacity
to
stakeholders,
The
aAshocks.
view
countryÕs
latest
View
tothe
development
Boards
growth
toof
gaining
from
Tovolatility
countryspecific
review
dateaIMFhasof
in
these
the
12003.
Conference
Revised
The views
version
on Development
expressed
of a paper Economics
are presented
those of Ð Europe
by the
the author
held
author
in Paris
and atdothe
notonAnnual
necessarily
15-16Bank
May represe
those
6nt
97
Millennium
Amar
Dealing
been
1990s.
the
achieving
long-term
necessary
comprehensive
these
The
Heavily
what
development
progress
HIPC
sustainability.
From:
FONDAD,
Fromnext
heavily
Debt
Bhattacharya1
an
the
Initiative,
ofWhile
countries.
HIPC
with
important
Indebted
February
the
section
Initiative
towards
Relief
sustained
debt
first
Development
Debt
indebted
objectives.
World
the
and
sustainability.
step
Section
Relief
toconcerted
debt
initial
reviews
Poor
the
and
2004,
element
Bank.
Achieving
growth
can
poor
towards
Millennium
MDGs,
mindful
difficulties
Countries
-Goals
www.fondad.org
and
3Section
thrust
the
Myths
ofbuilding
countries,
concludes.
and
approach
cannot
the
these
status
ofthe
Ipoverty
and
was
Development
2(HIPC)
the
development
will
sets
ofneed
development
do
Reality
ofis
onthe
the
argue
inreducing
reduction
implementation
Initiative
out
the
needed
focus
the
topoorest
anpreserve
foundations
that
Goals
agenda
pursuit
agenda
has
objectives,
tothe
while
countries
accelerate
(MDGs)
and
shifted
ofdebt
debt
ofassesses
tooflaid
the
preserving
debt
different
accelerate
overhang
in
theatoin
has
relief
more
theofis a
2 Lower-middle-income.
43preceded
1assistance
What
The
debate2
advocacy
Initiative
original
objectives
reschedulingÓ
higher
payments
Forty-two
for
GNI.
large
countries,
the
debt
trade;
institutions;
creditors;
upheavals
98
From:
FONDAD,
Table
(period
Category
HIPC
*Other
Note:
Source:
Development
Several
For
Including
Implementation
From
HIPC
14
early
ItLMI*
Their
were:
38asustained
relative
1HIPC
IDA
social
percent
comprehensive
Can(not)
and
Debt
February
External
average)
70
World
the
Initiative
on
objective
are
1980Ð1984
FONDAD
1990s
(Brooks
countries
(Angola,
was
of
share
their
adverse
inadequate
Debt
120
countries
four
deliberations
the
Indicators,
HIPC
reduced.Ó3
Relief
debt
and
spending
non-concessional
Bank,
modified
of
to
103
part
(Table
Relief
publications
countries
Yield
of
debt
macroeconomic
2004,
Debt
Initiative.
poverty
the
their
etofGlobal
sustainability
shocks
1985Ð1989
Kenya,
the
was
have
developing
to
21
ofas
al.,
22review
Òremoving
developing
burdens
debt
É2002.
1).
-Achieving
www.fondad.org
33
HIPC
launched
key
in
own
30to38
been
Myths
Percentage
provoked
reduction
and
1998).
that
Vietnam
1999
The
management;
27
Development
non-governmental
the
economies.
and
Initiative
1990Ð1994
33
provided
identified
increased
secular
26country
main
imbalances
lending
and
are
to
the
extent
assessment
in
worldÕs
the
through
and
to
encompass,
Reality
potentially
1996
debt
by
factors
ofMDGs
aFinance,
deterioration
key
Yemen),
Ò[freeing]
that
debt
Relative
and
GDP
1995Ð2000
and
large
sharply
following
overhangÓ,
as
population
acivil
and
information
refinancing
oforganisations.
Òpermanent
cash
HIPCs4
is
behind
extent
in
weak
the
see
only
sustainable
to
during
2002,
addition
debt
strife
uppolicies
Initiative
Table
extensive
accounting
other
the
the
8and
in
byand
resources
service
percent
for
exit
the
build-up
terms
policies
strong
5additional
and
2.World
low-income
to1980s
percent
the
without
The
from
and
political
the
ofsee
but
debate
for
ofand
Bank,
OED,
of HIPC
that
World
2003.
Amar
Implementation
anticipated.
the
point
Nicaragua
2).
without
point,
Not
Republic
Liberia*,
Potentially
Togo
HIPC
*Conflict-affected
Note:
Pr
decision
domestic
preparation
an
reached
The
eliminate
growth
burden
significantly,
As
exceeded
second
From:
FONDAD,
Table
(as
Mauritania,
Reached
Uganda
receiving
Guinea,
Malawi,
ncipe,
upsurge
shown
enhanced
Four
yet
HIPC
of
Bhattacharya
assistance
countries
including
2HIPC
most
and
under
half
January
debt
at
its
February
Status
completion
decision
Guinea-Bissau*,
Niger,
countries
of
point
conflict.
programme
in
debt
in
Senegal,
Myanmar*,
the
interim
decision
in
poverty
Debt
are
Congo*,
sustainable
decision
Figure
of
Mozambique,
Of
framework,
December
relief.
the
civil
excessive
service.
is
but
to
it
the
of
2004)
Rwanda*,
the
Mali
conflict
Relief
HIPC
2004,
point
99
progressing
cannot
the
relief
are
Sierra
countries.
the
And
HIPC
can
reduction.
1,
1990s,
point
42
Cpoint
Somalia*,
strife.
and
Among
point
2003
te
same
Initiative
aggregate
42
HIPCs,
considered
HIPC
in
be
-But
www.fondad.org
and
and
without
preliminary
debt
Nicaragua,
SHonduras,
Benin
affected.
dÕIvoire,
guarantee
Myths
Eligible
Benin,
Congo*,
Leone*,
Burundi*,
oalthough
the
considered
and
the
in
level
official
Cameroon,
ten
Tom
process
The
overhang
steadily
27
Sudan*,
case
July
Although
in
January
11
and
have
Angola*,
Democratic
official
Bolivia,
have
and
as
reduces
Ethiopia,
March
to
countries
Zambia
HIPCs
Madagascar,
CLao
of
a2003.
there
Reality
Tanzania,
Central
was
documents
other
net
reached
have
to
net
Chad,
te
reached
and
the
that
but
2004,
P.D.R.,
the
2003,
derailed
bring
transfers
dÕIvoire
Kenya,
the
increase
inflows
has
Burkina
sustainable
Central
poor
more
Republic
posed
reduction
Democratic
The
still
African
their
respectively
debt
been
decision
and
was
debt
countries
Gambia,
slowly
Vietnam,
aby
to
Faso,
was
Guyana
to
African
interrupted
burden
in
trended
considerable
completion
levels
constraint
Republic*,
sudden
of
HIPCs
reach
of
external
about
debt
Republic
than
point
Congo
Guyana,
Ghana,
the
and
Yemen
(Table
Republic,
of
have
down
burdens
decision
todebt
under
has
to
by
to
financing.
reach
Comoros,
in the
Mali,
of
variation
early
additional
worth
aggregate
of
increased
The
reasonable
HIPC
for
completion
than
100
From:
FONDAD,
Figure
0(in
Aggregate
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
16
14
12
10
Official
Source:
2468 abillions
aim
example,
From
the
Initiative.
countries.
shift
graduates
anticipated
1990s
noting
HIPC
1World
ofdebt
February
savings
Debt
Net
net
inDebt
concessionality
net
financing
in
the
level
point,
totransfers
the
that
was
Resource
of
official
Relief
transfers
service
Bank,
less
HIPC
in
While
Relief
dollars,
pattern
in
This
at
brought
new
2004,
they
the
butthan
debt
Initiative
exit,
Global
borrowings
to
trend
net
along
Transfers
have
-development
www.fondad.org
have
support
to
downturn
Achieving
ofbut
$10
service
down
Myths
intransfers
of
developing
term.
Development
net
underscores
received
2002
fallen
billion
flows
itand
toisto
transfers
the
led
due
cannot
UgandaÕs
the
in
NPV
toHIPCs
the
assistance
to
Reality
from
development
export
toinMDGs
to
an
reduce
targeted
terms)
countries.
these
HIPCs
an
Finance,
2000.
the
increasing
ensure
aincrease
toearnings
debt-to-exports
peak
implementation
importance
countries.
the
individual
have
This
(ODA)
150
debt
ofThis
objectives
debt
2002.
declined
percent
$14
is
share
in
toburden
sustainability
andaHIPCs
is
the
billion
ofHIPCs.
larger
higher
ofratio
both
ratio,
at
oftoand
it the
is
because
intothe
adecline
the
of
Amarparallel
171
projected
poorer
increases
Mauritania.
below
point
export
In
supporting
sustained
ante
for
was
eased
Initiative.
fulfil
macroeconomic
development
PRSP;
reform,
The
take
decision
Fourteen
recorded
1995.
the
institutional
have
reduction
Despite
track
positioned
with
contrast,
meet
data
school
From:
FONDAD,
apercent
binding
improvements
strongest
Bhattacharya
requirement
hold
been
available
the
are
the
in
country
during
and
Countries
to
HIPC
than
performance
three
enrolment
governance
this
February
time,
point
of
annual
meet
goal
likely
atDebt
target
growth
(iii)
in
increasing
efforts.
only
policy
on
expected
Bolivia,
with
in
In
and
the
decision
debt-to-exports
debt
2000
requirements:
many
encouraging
to1data
stabilisation
performance
aimprovements.
access
on2001,
long-term
the
order
has
implementation
performance
26
GDP
that
majority
on
Relief
largely
debt
and
of
reach
in
out
child
goal.
2004,
101
stocks
and
in
though
case
and
been
countries
the
the
policies
growth
appear
43institutional
export
Tanzania
accelerated
order
have
social
to
ofpoint.
relief,
onthe
the
increased
mortality,
-basis
www.fondad.org
percent
establishment
of
reach
reflected
safe
asreflecting
can
debt
not
progress,
of
Myths
the
already
decision
the
to
(i)
rates
on
aperformance
and
criteria
In
spending
the
37
Increased
ratios
help
and
all
that
water
ofand
result
sustainability
amounts
allow
the
track
initial
staying
(for
addition
HIPCs
and
higher
reform
MDGs.
current
poverty
and
institutions
the
in
Mozambique
restore
HIPC
completion
in
have
reached
and
none
where
Reality
inwith
reforms
point.
more
at
excess
toofnone
focused
26
improved
more
asand
of
HIPCs
than
levels
the
Initiative
entrants,
on
programme;
least
reached
meet
were
low
countries
to
part
of
trends
areduction.
9countries
debt
terms
track
completion
sustained
available
case
strong
While
stronger
the
out
of
borrowing.
that
appear
the
also
have
depends
point,
one
on
of
ofto
social
that
4growth
the
sustainability
decision
HIPCs
of
ratio
of
with
public
percent
enhanced
goal
borrowing
can
such
this
year)
responsible
remained
is
policy
(ii)
that
the
28
meet
Burkina
new
to
have
best
aThere
policy
growth,
data
crucially
aimed
lay
the
expenditures.
performance.
point
are
by
HIPCs
aofthe
requirement
join
HIPC
24So2015.
financing.
of
expenditure
reached
track
begun
point
since
128
the
track
IMFÕs
poverty
on
countries
are
while
ais
Faso
at
the
has
show
and
with
primary
full
HIPCs
percent
basis
an
likely
for
at
record
to
Inonex
record
to
PRGF
aand
awas
for
to
2 Achieving
Three
efforts
Millennium
important
The
international
Poverty
gained
country
participation,
partnership
Financing
Johannesburg)
meet
countries
and
There
to
MDGs
robust
translate
development
orientation.
is
attainment
currently
than
school
reach
the
million
expected
domestic
completion
102
From:
FONDAD,
beFrom
no
unlikely
MDGs
collective
rich
more
MDGs.
quality
the
hinges
$14
developments
is
sometimes
country
the
HIPC
wide
growth.
and
toDebt
Reduction
level
in
February
recognise
MDGs
countries
and
also
per
financing
resources,
milestone
for
committed
First,
growth
spends
2015
accelerate
Summit
of
only
annual
would
Debt
the
acceptance
critically
goals
to
and
better
Third,
student.
Ðbenchmarks
Development
has
and
agreement,
that
all
Relief
efforts
of
Second,
generate
target,
MDGs
based
alignment.
the
about
delivery
Relief
there
into
$74
not
2004,
and
aStrategy
generated
broader
varies
of
external
have
the
committed
has
gap.
into
comprehensive
to
aid.
case,
while
the
the
million
be
development
the
on
progress
Only
60the
multi-dimensionality
of
as
sound
can
on
made
we
-expenditures
www.fondad.org
generated
sufficient
If
goal
reached
Achieving
togrowth
principles
or
widely
MDGs.
percent
of
Myths
adoption
athe
(in
development
on
sustained
also
global
Paper
Third,
be
25
financing
Ethiopia
focus
anew
at
rapid
schooling
policies
to
the
per
ofinternational
conjunction
ÒconsensusÓ
no
percent
least
know
on
To
and
approach
provide
depending
100
before
for
development
disagreement
is
year
of
aReality
commitment
and
progress
poverty
take
the
ofpercent
domestic
new
of
economic
that
critical,
children
would
were
low-income
less
would
fight
the
measure
long-term
Monterrey
goals.
and
on
of
would
MDGs
country
an
2050.
dynamism
market
countriesÕ
primary
children
to
MDGs
with
good
disagreement
reduction
on
example,
need
onprimary
bepoverty.
of
community.
development
resources
be
rely
toneeded
the
Developing
framework
growth.
their
are
Inthat
the
in
marks
poverty
ownership
Doha
governance,
access,
to
required,
development.
countries
approach,
Conference
the
indouble,
way
many
education,
even
solely
effectiveness
MDGs
complete
progress
policy
Ethiopia
the
ability
and
school
area
First,
an
forward
Indeed,
topoor
to
enrolled.
and
Second,
debt
than
to
without
global
at
other
bridge
on
finance
and
ofhas
and
achieve
reforms
set
the
on
and
countries
primary
its
the
relief
appears
on
to
or
health,
toofown
there
$200less
the
ofthe
To in it
Amarresponse
expenditure
lower.
of
Hence
substantial
assistance
measurable
governance
delivery.
international
there
that
matching
now
accelerated
In
Bank
policies
partners
monitoring
enhance
community
maintain
the
complementary
will
growth
encouraging
developing
and
carried
improvements
governance,
across
The
performance
have
From:
FONDAD,
HIV/AIDS,
isbeen
achieve
combined
initial
institutions.
area
trend
Bhattacharya
can
and
poor
for
are
HIPC
And
how
and
countries.
transparency
out
February
provide
support
Fund
Ðand
momentum
that
the
These
reasonable
to
countries
for
strong
this
will
results
and
to
needed
progress
invest
countries,
Debt
needs
increases
progress
to
the
assessment
progress,
by
and
of
ofHIPC
focus
actions
inpoorest
community
translate
staff
actions
is
apublic
Bank
the
does
the
only
foundations
MDGs,
macroeconomic
there
Relief
the
by
request
most
and
2004,
103
are
to
on
in
The
Ðstaff
on
countries
environment,
the
have
on
be
not
be
based
foundations
basis
Ðon
implement
and
the
of
their
sustained,
even
countries
in
financial
to
those
on
but
there
Country
lagging
remains
bydeveloping
the
able
-that
www.fondad.org
effective
can
international
these
the
take
external
from
proposed
complement
accountability
development
the
Myths
developing
much
reflect
greater
on
for
MDGs.
poor.
will
and
development
priority
to
was
has
part
is
that
into
sound
principles
the
Policy
management
ais
scaling-up
the
lay
more
and
the
management
must
carried
been
wide
similar
there
ofhave
necessarily
in
The
public
financing.
if
aDevelopment
of
this
and
account
Monterrey
countries
the
Reality
investments
MDGs
country
place
framework
the
is
ithave
provide
countries
aim
areas
agenda.
atheir
and
dispersion
community.
the
foundations
needed.
clear
progress,
reached
isand
goals.
work
and
out
sector
but
can
into
of
Institutional
and
actions
sums
the
based
and
of
development
been
strategies,
this
allow
shows
not
only
But
take
assistance
consensus
of
It
themselves
improvement
trade
clear
concrete
Committee,
for
attention
direct
effective
and
On
management
completion
expended
the
is
in
as
slippages
such
on
The
framework
with
bestrong.
time.
by
monitoring
that
the
infrastructure.
by
only
for
policies.
performance
achallenge
commitments
UNmet
the
and
external
framework
their
international
part
the
actions
on
partners
sustained
there
Assessments
onin
But
where
needed
through
and
even
with
service
countries
indirect
greatest
and
points
ingood
is
of
While
the
international
policies
oftoto
is
someand
of to
costs
and
Performance
particular
expenditure
last
and
HIPCs
new
public
countries
MDGs.
strengthen
These
there
Monterrey
attainment
Doha
differential
Market
important
given
suffer
from
targeted
global
commitment
have
Initiative
developed
The
to
need
the
5towards
service
additional
104
From:
FONDAD,
percent
less
reporting
aid
second
replenishment
HIPC
foundations
From
year
agenda
an
reaffirmed
10
toeconomy.
HIPCs
efforts
are
that
HIPC
expenditure
restrictions
disproportionately
resources,
accord
than
percent
the
reduction
February
ensure
special
Initiative
Debt
that
shows
are
commensurate
underscored
external
countries
asconcern
service
of
they
requirement
on
and
financing
Debt
onit
systems
Ðalso
MDGs.
2treatment
were
to
of
the
agriculture,
debt
Relief
are
public
on
the
percent
that
are
this
of
for
was
Relief
bewas
need
the
and
2004,
MDGs.
medicines.
of
When
between
in
not
are
management
delivery
impediment
relief.
attainment
GDP
into
successful
and
mainly
are
will
sustained
before
benchmarks
resources
HIPC
differential
commitment,
the
in
sector
many
to
the
HIPCs
met
effectively
Ðefforts
from
of
or
-the
www.fondad.org
The
subsidies
able
suitable
Achieving
take
are
HIPC
reduce
Myths
countries
critical
from
GDP
more
first
their
HIPCs.
by
TRIPS
commodity
The
debt
the
mechanisms.
three
rich
management
carried
of
And
to
most
system,
and
complementary
to
Trust
of
by
growth
that
on
HIV/AIDS
G-8
in
launch
and
for
particular
raise
the
service
priority.
decision
and
development
HIPCs
countries
demonstrated
the
2005.
terms
AnReality
governance
scaling
core
in
treatment
net
the
HIPCs.
deployed.
importance
and
budget
are
will
Fund.
average
assessment
out
medicines
agriculture
exporters.
MDGs
and
itand
part
the
transfers
of
MDGs
development
could
other
But
freed
and
burden
byLooking
will
only
accelerate
the
and
Without
up
The
can
quantity
formulation,
of
relevance
is
on
form
governance
Bank
actions
would
as
debt
Hence
is
their
in
benefit
industrial
Initiative,
completion
up
be
developed
of
to
most
goals
only
average,
and
they
was
aofservicing
HIPC
Many
if
that
and
difficult
by
successful
trade
are
meet
ain
critical
stand
ahead,
public
strengthening
efforts
issues
special
recently
be
and
they
strong
debt
to
integrate
of
progress
Fund
to
the
countries
HIPCs
from
will
their
met
excess
isare
to
the
quality
HIPCs
execution
countries.
the
to
countries
points.
relief,
single
debt
itaburden
staff
the
in
if
be
for
need
to
and
gain
HIPC
ifkey.
HIPCs.
in
to
will
the
will
of
meet
with
and
ofmost
lay
ifbe
ordebt
aid.
the
Amarto
Leading
announced
by
these
new
deployed
In
those
predictable,
financing,
committed
ensure
importance
assures
Long-term
export
and
mobilise
be
growth
point
sufficiently
ratio
Initiative.
financing
very
of
HIPCs
without
decision
countries
There
the
is
that
From:
FONDAD,
some
needed
particular,
done
the
commitments
terms
governmentÕs
ability
HIPC
Bhattacharya
cautious
HIPCs
commitments
new
with
have
and
above
can
are
be
HIPC
that
prospects,
prospects
financing
upable
$16
long-term
on
increasing
February
than
resources
to
countries
commitments,
commitments
to
at
debt
of
where
needed
also
in
two
credible
adequate
ato
can
Debt
billion.
there
the
But
to
allow
reach
the
new
case-by-case
to
IDA-13
and
the
harmonise
HIPCs
approach
important
toefforts
sustainability
rely
utilise
quickly
and
make
the
warrant
150
for
Relief
Rome
financing.
own
and
needs
curb
2004,
105
since
are
past.
is
debt
on
upwill
the
and
existing
reform
resources
also
export
percent
most
on
was
The
it
true
vulnerability
finances.
government
the
totranslated
fall
High
inappropriate
that
MDGs,
sustainability.
to
of
the
their
grant
for
-build
www.fondad.org
Monterrey
more
and
additionally
borrowing
40
an
policy
immediate
is
HIPCs
high
Myths
target
additionality
basis.
new
HIPCs
short
programmes,
Level
base
concessional
percent
important
the
ifup
simplify
that
The
target
HIPCs
aid
fungible
full
element
toand
depends
degree
borrowing.
implemented
This
the
challenges
international
ability
finances
has
must
their
into
of
programmes
aid
Forum
meet
this
There
developed
that
allocations
challenge
could
to
adopted
magnitude
grants
Reality
the
assessment
developed
borrowing.
todebt
donor
determine
of
be
for
step
actual
including
the
aid
primarily
shocks,
tolending
and
are
could
total
the
to
of
vulnerability
provided
benefit
have
For
these
make
MDGs.
be
for
in
ahead
could
practices
debt
athe
by
to
countries
are
poorest
iscope
outlays.
provided
few
take
of
some
this
community.
aid
untie
strengthened
and
of
the
aid
government
the
has
countries.
Experience
toIDA
more
for
relief
Of
on
net
by
therefore
increase
greatly
HIPCs
by
that
on
diversified
the
HIPC
time,
most
regard.
ensure
more
critical
growth
sustainability
necessarily
IDA,
with
countries
recurrent
aid
external
grants.
effectively
as
the
will
have
Although
on
NPV
warrants
isshocks
and
where
vulnerable
was
could
the
for
The
ifhas
terms
magnitude
ODA
that
estimated
and
to
debt-toexports
be
The
for
that
tothese
bulk
While
some
first
constrained
and
cost
the
shown
that
ato
or
theto
ofto
finance
sustainability.
Aconcessional
access
As
the
architecture
will
absorb
3of
The
burden
countries.
strengthening
progress
majority
without
In
subsidies
HIPC
new
to
concerted
countries
relief
be
106
From:
FONDAD,
second
Conclusion
avoid
HIPCs
prepared
such
addition
be
the
Education
HIPC
external
From
beHIPC
countries.
able
provided
toFebruary
some
of
effort
most
increased
available
financing
complementary
any
challenge
undertake
Initiative,
towards
of
Debt
need
external
HIPC
that
in
and
toat
The
Debt
amounts
the
to
borrowing
loans
is
agriculture,
financing
help
Fast
comprehensive
the
of
Relief
toRelief
step
countries
HIPC
can
steps
on
risk
Where
not
MDGs
As
policies,
the
2004,
public
have
when
has
grant
international
meet
so
is
financing
policy
Track
apave
upto
yet
of
process
inMDGs
when
MDGs.
without
group,
1990s
warranted,
as
to
support
rigorous
that
its
needed.
new
than
-not
www.fondad.org
exceptional
in
the
improve
or
Achieving
investments
ensure
Initiative
be
to
Myths
and
the
fully
more
external
place
borrowing,
governance
But
highly
will
reaching
can
prevent
provided
levels
will
way
they
any
actions
infrom
scaling
institutional
international
While
none
and
debt
threaten
that
suitable
implemented,
for
market
other
community,
not
the
to
also
will
concessional
the
comparable
the
better
Reality
afinancing
financing.
shows
ensure
accelerated
of
on
endure
the
through
management
international
HIPCs
some
on
uprecurrence
for
have
and
remain
group
MDGs
international
access
the
grant
their
MDGs.
long-term
amounts
the
HIPCs
most
institutions
aid
can
that
set
HIPCs
part
the
and
reforms
community
and
borrowing.
will
more
needs
international
terms.
to
own
and
is
have
As
HIPCs
in
terms.
benefits
the
systems
will
growth
such
of
ofdependent
and
other
awill
the
reduce
motion
efforts
elimination
debt
community
critical
both
HIPC
with
debt
long-term
toconcessionality.
matching
be
the
community.
financing
needs
experience
reach
Without
accelerate
low-income
in
and
HIPC
in
able
the
of
group
grants
overhangs.
bulk
the
HIPC
and
place
faster
the
atodebt
priority
on
HIPC
needs
to
support
of
will
has
debt
orof for
AmarImplementationÓ,
Birdsall,
References
HIPC
paper
Relief,
Brooks,
Ketchekmen
Histories
from
Washington
Claessens,
Wickham
Heavily
Income
Elbadawi,
Development:
AERC
EURODAD
European
Gelb,
Non-Oil
IMF
the
Report
of
September
ÐÐÐÐÐ
Achievement
Bank,
Jubilee
Leaders
Martin,
http://www.jubilee2000gk.org/
Sustainability
From:
FONDAD,
the
and
Debt
Bhattacharya
Matter?:
Their
Policy
presented
(2003),
Alan
(2002a),
(2002b),
Washington
HIPC
Countries,
of
World
No.
August
Ray,
(1997),
Indebted
(2002),
HIPCs:
World
2000
and
Matthew,
February
Network
Problems
Nancy,
of
Ibrahim
the
12.
ExperienceÓ,
D.C.
Stijn,
and
DC/96-17,
Debt
Seminar,
of
the
Mariano
Ten
Toward
Bank
Coalition
The
ÒHIPC
Bank
Managing
17-18,
Ydahlia
AXiao
ÒHeavily
ÒThe
Long-Term
for
at2004,
ÒAnalytical
ÒPutting
Millennium
Relief
Stijn
Low-Income
Poor
on
NoteÓ,
D.C.,
with
107
Debt
Enrica
IMF,
and
of
toWIDER
(1996),
HIPCs:
aIMF/World
Additionality:
Debt
Ye
IMF/World
Enhanced
Cortes,
Dar
the
Helsinki,
CountriesÓ,
Alan
Business
Randa
Claessens
Game
Metzgen
Washington
(2001),
Director
April
-(1999),
www.fondad.org
IMF
mimeo,
Indebted
Development
Detragiache,
Es
Sustainable
and
Heavily
Interim
Debt
Myths
How
Gelb
ÒA
Debt
and
Developing
Working
Aspects
Salaam,
Alami
Francesca
Development,
HIPC
15.
Programme
Bank,
SustainabilityÓ,
to
(1998),
Plan?Ó,
ÒDebt
Washington
Bank,
ÒUnfinished
and
Donor
Finland.
(2001),
of
ChallengeÓ,
Indebted
and
Poor
Respond
In:
D.C.
Initiative
(2001),
Some
the
Reality
Paper
of
February.
Washington
Ishac
Conference
Sustainability
Development
Washington
Behavior
Ravi
External
Countries
Fornasari,
ÒExternal
Countries:
the
Paper
IMF
ÒFinancing
Concerning
for
toÒLong-Term
WP/98/72,
Brussels.
D.C.
Poor
Diwan
Kanbur
Debt
and
BusinessÐThe
Action
ShocksÓ,
presented
andin(HIPC)
Finance
CountriesÓ,
the
D.C.,
IMF/World
onthe
Problems
D.C.
(2001),
Debt
FirstÓ,
Committees,
AfricaÓ,
Benoit
Lessons
and
Debt
AfricaÕs
ProjectionsÓ,
to
President
IMF,
for
Debt
mimeo,
Peter
Resolve
for
Ðat
AfricaÕs
WorldÕs
ÒWill
of
Status
the
Low-
DebtAfricaÓ,
OED
InitiativeÓ,
Washington
Oxfam
in
World
Countries,
108
From:
FONDAD,
(2003),
From
Relief
International
Bank
HIPC
February
Debt
D.C.
(2002),
World
Debt
International,
ÒThe
Washington
Operations
Relief
Relief
Heavily
Bank,
2004,
Global
(2003),
towww.fondad.org
D.C.
-Washington
Evaluation
Achieving
Indebted
Myths
Development
London.
ÒDebt
andthe
Poor
Relief
D.C.
Department,
Reality
Finance:
MDGs
Countries
and theFinancing
World
(HIPC)
HIV/AIDS
Bank,
Debt
the
Crisis
Poorest
1 This chapter is largely based on an evaluation of debt relief carried out for
Policy and
the
Affairs of the
Operations
Netherlands.
Evaluation
The text
Department
draws heavily
(IOB) ofonthe theMinistry
second synthesis
of Foreignrepor
tof that study, Results of International Debt Relief (IOB, 2003), written by the
but also on the first synthesis report, Dutch Debt Relief Policy (IOB, 2002, onl
author,
yavailable in Dutch), written by Dick van der Hoek, IOB Inspector and responsible
7Dfor
109
Perspective:
Geske
Netherlands
international
on
the
Euros
1999,
Multilateral
DimensionÓ
IBRD
debtor
more
From
in
The
From:
FONDAD,
ebtpromoting
developing
the
Netherlands
solution,
Dutch
Relief
loans
loans),
recently
1995
Dijkstra1
that
an
HIPC
country
overall
February
increasing
on,
Minister
the
of
to
Debt
from
The
debt
to
the
financial
countries.
but
IDA
enable
to
the
Netherlands
from
study.
recognised
Multilateral
Relief
aDutch
Case
the
creation
2004,
also
relief
(providing
Donor
for
share
which
IDA-only
HIPC
ofwww.fondad.org
part
-Development
institutions
government
the
Loans
included
Myths
was
multilateral
Trust
of
relatively
spent
ofthe
funds
Debt
spent
countries
from
the
and
Fund.
onFunds
Enhanced
contributions
problem.
to
also
Cooperation
Reality
the
debt
on(IFIs)
early
repay
multilateral
debt
IFIs
to
under
played
relief
HIPC
repay
that
were
Out
earlier
service
were
supervision
anto
Initiative
supported,
ofpast
between
athe
not
active
heavy
the
debts.
nonconcessional
was
debts
only
1.6
ÒFifth
1990
paid,
burden
role
ofbillion
in
for
of1999.
part
and
the
theof
and
example,
meeting
Enhanced
Meetings
Initiative.
to
other
IFIsÕ
contributions
from
biggest
disbursements,
and
The
for
elaborating
end
leading
would
donor
Dutch
In
ideal
appears
This
statements.
HIPC
processes
in
the
additionality
setting
These
where
debt
110
From:
FONDAD,
the
sum,
particular:
Dutch
the
to
question
Debt
bilateral
chapter
Initiative,
problems
relief
officials
donors
lending
enhance
coordination
bilateral
solution
three
possible
HIPC
HIPC
the
inRelief
contributor
UK
HIPC
the
to
conditions
February
the
HIPC
of
government
onCologne,
(IOB,
traditional
more
be
Debt
the
The
Trust
aand
Netherlands
It
issues
is
Jubilee
to
Initiative.
aims
debt
ofInitiative
capacity
should
PRSP
participation
the
by
of
contributions
donors.
bypassing
to
brings
(i)
illustrated
additional
World
expressed
Netherlands
do
debt
ÒownershipÓ
development
the
from
Relief
2002).
aspects
providing
debt
2004,
Fund
the
ideal
to
and
with
in
the
for
are
where
to
coherence
2000
relief
be
also
aadd
Bank
aid.
to
debt
relief;
managed
same.
for
By
the
form
role
debt
discussed
-Donor
www.fondad.org
inMyths
participation
embraced
donor
was
had
much
It
some
the
related
activities
the
themselves
August
strongly
toand
the
addition
HIPC
PRSPs
problems
relief
(the
for
immediately
from
expected
and
cooperation
of
relief.
made
been
The
as
fore
other
Perspective:
principal
larger
in
question-marks
of
and
bymeans
poorest
policy
donors
the
and
possible,
Trust
democracy,
Dutch
2001,
also
the
relation
to
debt
in
(IOB,
approved
the
some
and
(iii)
IMF
supported
receiving
case
aid
Reality
toHIPC
of
the
for
firmly
IMF
countries
that
World
Fund
of
conditionality
became
to
and
for)
relief
inof
view
countries.
the
problematic
flows
decision
2002).
began
policy
international
the
following
putting
should
civil
the
September
in
the
Initiative
to
creditors
The
regular
Netherlands
in
and
poor
new
the
inmay
Bank,
was
problematic
order
country.
the
this
to
financing
policies;
the
providing
terms
requirement
Case
Once
like
society
favour
in
loans,
Netherlands.
that
be
countries,
each
pressure
in
conditions
leading
vary
Annual
and
Furthermore,
general.
HIPC
sections,
financed
to
foreign
aspects
of
favour
1999,
of
the
inmultilateral
by
as
of
of(ii)
urged
not
In
increased
decisionmaking
thus
from
the
was
actual
would
Initiative.
of
perpetuating
resources
US,
the
an
these
consequences
Board
the
addition,
device
ondonor
the
reduce
of
debt
Netherlands
aid
the
and
of
raising
asbring
Japan
IFIs,
the
and
Whether
the
the
much
these
flows
relief,
for
lack
G-7it
the
to anof
Geske
donor,
The
debt
Department
Netherlands.
policies,
country
Tanzania,
1(Mozambique,
One
successive
countries
20
conclusions
community
poor
to
economies
Sachs,
been
policies
Thus,
be
because
relief
this
growth
for
sustainability
the
creditor
amounts
From:
FONDAD,
The
made
years,
pay
no
analysis
of
debt
HIPC
numerator
relief
countries,
given,
book)
Dijkstra
Role
the
more
HIPC
and
the
their
2002);
leading
projections
around
studies:
it
of
February
(Easterly,
burden
countries
side
aDebt
Uganda
is
have,
and
has
to
primary
therefore
(IOB)
of
characteristics
rounds
than
delivers
have
new
carried
literature
can
and
The
in
This
Nicaragua
that
primary
grow,
Donors
they
done
(ii)
of111
HIPC
to
is
loans.
this
on
be
giving
that
just
and
already
Relief
last
of
Bolivia,
and
the
2004,
evaluation
they
of
aquestion
unlikely.
average,
still
drawn:
far
let
others
in
at
debt
out
the
2002).
stop
too
continuation
this
chapter
Zambia,
in
creditors,
more
another
debt
loan
section
the
decision
Although
review
and
have
too
them
-alone
www.fondad.org
for
Ministry
Perpetuating
little
pointed
relief
need
low
Myths
isis
Jamaica,
relief.
(i)
conclude
debt
Debt
sustainability
relationships.
Tanzania).
of
little
the
persisted
experienced
debt
But
examined
is
comprised
out
to
round
growth
summarises
and
current
more
some
whether
relief
debt
Sustainability
point,
these
and
and
largely
Policy
but
reduce
to
much
relief
ofeconometric
TodayÕs
in
Mozambique,
debt
argue
that
of
the
Reality
around
Foreign
which
not
in
relief
bad
Debt
alleviating
less
loans
extensively
debt
for
is
the
rescheduling,
which
aand
poverty
poor
optimistic
based
low
relief.
just
enough
too
policies.
the
study
that
likely
ratios,
All
three
Problems
such
heavily
HIPC
attention
aid
Operations
problems
or
are
Affairs
growth
much
countries,
suggest
changes
sufficient
DSAs
onexpected
study,
the
because
Analyses
into
of
aNicaragua,
to
(Hanlon,
Initiative
were
Two
anproject
long
the
relief
infor
general.
Dutch
indebted
international
allow
Many
GDP
rates
perpetuate
evaluation
of
different
unable
that
has
other
that
and
field
debt
the
Evaluation
time,
it
and
the
either
authors
(DSAs)
debt
their
2000;
has
been
to
eight
in
delivers
future
should
Peru,
burden
will
export
words,
large
studies
poorest
poor
enable
to
be
despite
the
already
relief
given
bad
end
made
ofdebt
(also
past
ofdebt
the
them
toin
2 Only
mostly
fifteen
repay
The
efforts
eight
during
originated
since
service
one
of
quickly
Why
community
problems
liquidity
was
so
these
This
creditors
not
primarily
European
countries,
down
flows,
countries
never
enforcing
(ECAs)
fiction
the
debt
112
From:
FONDAD,
multilateral
the
that
IOB
of
was
1990s?
to
private
IFIs
Debt
sustainability
wrong
on
service
these
multilateral
countries
wrote
HIPC
inFebruary
concessional
the
1990s
grant
they
and
years
evaluation
in
paid
make
there
countries
the
that
inthem
banks.
are
Relief
Nicaragua
apparently
problem.
awere
(Dooley,
1990s.
from
reasons
The
diagnosis
no
the
Debt
debts.
the
institutions.
problem
old
managed
down
did
with
debts
debt
they
preferred
in
have
so
longer
1990s
most
official
to
multilateral
involved
the
debts
early
in
They
loans.
time,
from
Relief
not
much
on
2004,
Eighty
respect
reschedulings
could
do
would
shown
of
creditors
for
unsustainable
The
fact
1994).
this
(that
international
analysis
general
of
to
their
has
decrease.
posed
was
began
providing
aso,
the
in
new
1990s.
but
the
response
private
Yet,
get
creditors,
-Donor
www.fondad.org
grow
had
governments
receive
figure
that
shown
in
per
total
very
so
Myths
is,
results
to
lending
During
Official
dubious
these
limited
the
to
large
the
areason
and
both
institutions
cent
are
shows
new
It
out
Perspective:
onand
this
solvency
much
withdraw
that
debts
The
wrong
creditors,
them
was
study
acted
to
and
partly
the
were
soft
preferred
loans
again
of
flows
the
ofReality
financial
to
loans.
they
large
effectiveness
that
ais
related
creditors,
lower,
the
to
their
and
with
full
international
the
increased
these
diagnosis
temporary
1980s,
bilateral
often
conditions),
no
exceeded
that
as
and
(IOB,
extend
problem.
from
due
of
indeed
volume
continuation
multilateral
guarantee
volume
if
new
There
always
value
mainly
debt
The
atthe
creditors,
export
countries
the
to
paid
institutions.2
countries
loans
2003).
money
about
new
the
large
on
received
Case
debt
during
international
liquidity
problems.
service
are
export
of
ofthe
debt
debtor
maintained
for
oftheir
big
new
growth
the
loans
fact
the
for
debt
to
new
and
no
of
60other
forgiveness
debt
incoming
from
ofthe
during
agencies,
crisis
USloans
governments
debt
had
agencies
credit
percent.
past
the
loans
that
writing
out
most
relief
the
and
claims.
relief.
will
problem
However,
bilateral
1990s,
aactual
Netherlands
ability
The
of
hand,
the
ten
to
trends
temporary
grants,
the
was
ofwas
official
agencies
these
the
share
and
their
toLongrun
Since
andto
debt
3 In the context of the HIPC Initiative, they contribute to the HIPC Trust Fund.
grants
bailed
countries,
hazard.
much
The
themselves.
one
flow
donors
concessional
funds
Netherlands
to
Fund
banks,
Second,
bilateral
than
debtor
multilateral
Although
these
indirectly
Ògood
Over
Replenishment
112),
same
subsidy
(ESAF)
Initiative
financed
Trust
From:
FONDAD,
Geske
make
the
bailing-out
of
longer
of
and
otherwise
the
period.
Dijkstra
of
heavily
moneyÓ
or
in
HIPC
toFebruary
out
the
and
ESAF
such
countries
ofThey
new
these
the
account
the
to
most
course
about
partly
1996,
these
donors
debt
the
private
bilateral
ways
creditors
through
in
Debt
than
loans
spend
Trust
similar
as
preferential
creditors.
could
loans
IFIs
debt
creditors.3
after
The
concessional
bilateral
indebted
Fund
IMF.
1996,
113
the
claims,
would
equal
and
countries.
in
of
from
Relief
ifservice
also
with
Netherlands
2004,
and,
that
part
Fund
creditors,
continue
which
of
Fund
these
Òbad
amounted
the
With
later
they
funds
and
creditors
paid
be
the
this
made
the
programme
IFIs,
as
provide
of
making
countries,
1990s,
-Enhanced
www.fondad.org
This
for
donors
moneyÓ.
the
since
had
bilateral
status
This
three
entire
into
Myths
aloans
in
IFIs.
their
the
of
so
Trust,
While
these
their
consequence,
Special
case.
to
creation
implies
had
thus
three
the
that
also
during
IMF,
more
is
Dutch
debt
the
the
themselves
mechanisms.
1.6
and
First,
development
of
aid
amount
Structural
during
to
loans
possible.
regional
not
its
imprudent
allowing
Third,
these
they
contributed
PRGF-HIPC
donors
different
interest
to
the
bilateral
billion
relief
Reality
suffer
Operations
or
contributions
the
that
an
of
name
the
possible.
they
IFI
even
perpetuate
of
countries
efficient
the
1990s
the
bilateral
bailed
the
helped
IDA
multilateral
only
Dutch
granted
was
the
moral
Bilateral
loans
In
euros
Adjustment
1980s
lending
contributed
subsidies
grants
direct
original
Trust.
ways
debt
IFIs
aReplenishment
substantially
changed
and
consequences
of
provide
way,
debt
out
hazard,
to
In
reduced
(IOB,
official
problems.
for
the
relief
can
use
debt
to
byespecially
experienced
as
donors
debt
In
behaviour
maintain
fact,
donors
they
relief
HIPC
the
the
or
contributions
IADB.
pay
of
Facility
into
1996,
development
grants
problems
2002,
toIMF
relief
isthrow
other
the
necessary
aid
IDA
bilateral
provided
the
creditors
the
an
ofhad
only
The
like
in
tothis
value
money.
p.
inthe
to
ESAFHIPC
moral
nonrepayment
special
means
on lowincome
the
to ofbe
4 If the funds do become available, it will probably be at the expense of bilate
grants
ral
to
1999,
Netherlands
HIPC
disbursements.
$34
90
Will
first
bear
consideration
however,
regards
$5.95
framework
and
relief
countries.4
billion
debt
The
$2.7
met
countries
Ôoff-marketÕ
symbolically
with
enables
the
then
bookkeeping
part
reducing
114
From:
FONDAD,
this
million.
Dutch
million
US
IDA,
costs
from
proceeds
Debt
Trust
these
part
relief
abillion
used
of
when
glance,
billion
HIPC
(see
had
will
member
Trust,
the
of
to
its
IMFÕs
February
reveals
2002b).
the
Relief
Minister
of
objected
for
Fund
disbursed
debt
the
Debt
the
immediately
through
World
be
So
for
gold
book
profit
the
(SDR
IMFÕs
gold
and
of
basis
there
of
will
state.
the
capital
making
Enhanced
The
expected
at
far,
HIPC
remarks
of
dynamics
other
this
from
Relief
costs
the
that
14th
If
HIPC
reserves
then
value
2004,
Bank,
the
2.2
sales,
HIPC
the
Netherlands
have
own
to
of
for
the
is
that
bilateral
Trust
$122
financing
This
aupgrading,
Finance
the
bilateral
IDA
expense
multilateral
Initiative
billion),
this.
bought
symbolic
becomes
aWorld
of
resources.
to
Initiative.
future
-Donor
www.fondad.org
onMyths
HIPC
became
European
IBRD
total
tochange
change.
additional
meaning
Netherlands
million,
debt
Replenishment,
Fund,
for
ÔpaperÕ
be
additionality
beThe
Initiative
Bank
profits
back
upgraded.
Perspective:
announced
costs
met
of
donors
the
illiquid
loans.
the
had
relief
of
gold
and
with
contributions
abut
IMF
to
Union
With
new
for
that
ÐReality
debt
from
large
At
purpose,
in
sale
biggest
disbursed
Canada
development
the
The
atTo
of
money
that
then
sales
only
World
have
first,
the
the
afor
least,
(IOB,
relief
$8.1
bilateral
and
The
amount
disadvantage
(Felgenhauer,
another
was
part
quantity
restore
inThe
HIPC
planned
money
IMF
proceeded
framework
largest
114
HIPC
the
provide
pledged
is
contributor
Bank
but
repurchase
investment
launched,
billion.
the
$138
2002,
not
are
of
that
inthe
and
Initiative?
first
on
are
of
Case
Initiative,
is
banks.
next
large
loans
which
IMF
this
terms
multilateral
contributions
for
forthcoming,
estimated
of
SDR
donor.
million,
the
still
for
more
aused
p.slightly
major
to
oftime.
planned
gold
of
section).
The
2005
1.8
2000),
lending
contribution
111).
UK
$2.15
to
awill
of
income
the
oftransaction
than
to
using
essential.
InNetherlands
remaining
the
goldproducing
is
gold
billion,
the
actual
At
Further
(IMF
finance
plus
the
at
have
$2.5
to
thus
poorest
on
the
larger
capacity,
debt,
debt
IFIs
in
sell
be
tois
the
sold
As
be
5 In two out of the four countries that had reached their completion points unde
r The
unsustainable
Geske
the
Given
donors.
relief
clear
Initiative.
period
five
problems
countries
bilateral
multilateral
In
volume
to
these
has
Advisory
from
This
justifiable
temporary
original
2abolishing
Debt
additional
experience
Operations
however,
1995
From:
FONDAD,
sum,
have
HIPC
IMF
proposed
years
long-term
has
relief
and
Dijkstra
that
poor
Lack
HIPC
given
of
would
the
February
Initiative
should
Commission,
also
rationale
showed
2000
that
10
are
donors
new
liquidity
bilateral
multilateral
(IMF),
and
the
of
to
an
Evaluation
Debt
Although
success
multilateral
grounds
provided
onwere
years
institutions
debt
for
inPRGF,
have
again
loans
been
Additionality
regular
increase
115
have
heavily
lending
IFI
re-appear
that
Relief
2002
once
IDA
2004,
they
service.5
toor
(World
proposed
for
lower
innet
debts,
reached
unable
of
from
that
donors
these
(International
2000).
and
under
(IMF
appeal
again
aid
Department
2000
will
the
indebted
to
balance
IMF
-in
www.fondad.org
institutions
the
development
these
transfers
than
Myths
Bank
regarding
will
poor
flows,
net
and
moral
loans
to
HIPC
borrowing.
the
and
are
their
eventually
will
Another
by
tobetween
IFIs
pay
transfers.
IDA,
again
countries,
the
poor
of
will
HIPC
and
2001,
its
expected
Initiative
countries,
hazard
are
have
so
(OED)
decision
off
be
payments
other
Meltzer
to
Reality
2002a).
shareholders,
debt
Financial
measure
countries
be
Initiative
that
continue
concessional
be
reduced.
banks
debt-to-export
their
to
There
all
1990
increase
discussed
of
can
preferred
toHIPC
development
sustainability,
step
debtor
The
isand
the
point
requires
extend
as
commission,
problems,
finance
continue.
debts,
to
are
toWorld
HIPC
to1995
Ain
the
Institution
do
stop
was
countries
debt
simple
abolish
more
countries
provide
of
with
not
below.
i.e.
and
creditors
only
Meltzer
Review
it(OED,
meant
part
that
the
Bank,
ratios
banks)
service.
suffer
which
reasons
Iton
have
is
relief
the
measure
grants
HIPC
IMF
the
iswould
new
and
likely
the
to
of
between
commission
the
abilateral
was
had
already
or
and
PRGF.
from
be
the
loans
grace
debtor
on
for
Ifthe
to
very
isthat
again
tothe
become
2003,
non-HIPC
within
have
that
experienced
to
anticipated
Although
first,
aggregate
effects
HIPC
countries,
be
The
look
the
in
evaluation,
regular
observed,
redistribution
countries
debt
possibilities
First,
some
Debtor
were
for
substantially
not
registered
116
From:
FONDAD,
developing
no
positive.
the
concern,
conclusion
first
additionality
the
included
Debt
continued
have
countries
at
relief
OPEC
not
p.countries
additionality
HIPC
aFebruary
that
absence
creditors
onRelief
the
aid
creditors
53).
to
declining
the
getting
reached
received
net
issue
one
with
countries,
indicating
the
debt
Debt
HIPC
an
in
there
developments
debt
flows
is
lack
Iit
in
The
countries
resource
reason
here.
reduce
inRelief
increase
the
that
recipient
leads
effect
first
of
high
not
should
is
the
relief.
from
countries
relief
that
were
new
2004,
decline
recent
their
may
of
issue
debt
in
net
to
atotal
decision
that
financed
the
of
debts
OED
smaller
additionality
to
elaborate
Dutch
may
granted
resources
see
athe
that
be
on
flows
were
usually
bedata
flows
debt
relief.
-Donor
www.fondad.org
decision
(OED,
aHIPC
additionality
is
of
aid
years:
more
countries.
those
in
1990s
be
at
debt
Myths
was
put
declining
(see
there
in
their
debt
what
the
no
point
relief,
net
that
from
least
budget.
net
Initiative
aindicate.
on
Perspective:
even
the
2003,
in
additionality
longer
not
stocks.
less
on
In
1990s
(IOB,
also
large
from
and
after
relief,
resource
would
net
has
points
relative
transfer
perspective
there
countries
aid
second
documents.
these
all
paying
part
greater
of
Reality
p.amount
debt
And
aid
indebted
below).
these
resource
been
This
was
2003).
budgets
donors,
1998,
HIPC
may
have
eight
These
54).
Second,
has
ofison
third,
flow
three
inhalf
relief
flows.
found
some
redistribution
share
in
be
creditors.
their
The
for
the
debt
not
particular.
happened
have
with
the
Nevertheless,
than
countries
As
Another
of
these
debt
2000
to
countries
greater
and
such
flows,
ofdebt
issues
Case
all
redistribution
HIPC
effective.
even
to
the
26stock
in
relief
may
other,
What
been
low
money
should
the
there
than
be
as
debts
developing
HIPC
total
OED
ofInitiative,
have
if
to
debts
reason
relief.
thus
1990s,
figures
and
than
matters
aadditional
Russia
The
ofreductions
back,
the
had
is
there
debt
less
may
aid
review
are
countries
not
since
seems
net
positive
then
the
only
reducing
Iathese
if
to
Netherlands
been
ultimately
volumes
is
two
cause
lead
will
relief
indebted
or
was
transfers
on
would
we
for
IOB
from
look
also
that
they
way
toto
have
26
just
toare
argue,
to
at
6 DAC
Organisation
Geske
Second,
relief
two
as
definition
are
does
donor
ODA
aid
country
The
influence
other
flow.
of
important.
hampers
policies.
to
debt
forward
Third,
countries.
and
redistribution
(Birdsall
higher
the
Policy
this
better
being
resources
From:
FONDAD,
net
debt
additional
possibilities
by
aid
flow
budget
second
does
OED
qualify
relief
overhang.
points
ispolicies
Dijkstra
countries
reasons
Most
concerned
HIPC
from
Official
definition
there
debts.
debt
and
creditors
budget.
to
relief.
private
by
Review
February
the
from
substitute
onDebt
Debt
et
toofto
would
country
issue
Apublications
Birdsall
To
Institutional
budgets
for
levels
Development
for
as
economic
lower
is
al.,
the
than
resources,
the
This
117
relief
This
from
establishes
adverse
Development
ODA,
imply
In
However,
investment
the
and
that
Relief
Economic
be
is
highly
2004,
that
here.
Development
additional.
donor
extent
2001;
this
and
its
debt
appears
had
other
taken
case
that
argument
and
issue
for
countries
governance
abut
that
growth
on
are
we
effect
less
selection
-HIPC
www.fondad.org
Some
case,
country
only
stock
Williamson
other
OED,
indebted
Assistance
of
debt
athe
but
that
AssessmentÓ
Myths
Cooperation
than
into
therefore
of
still
it
and
debt
to
this
Assistance
the
adequate
Initiative
modalities
and,
pay
reduction
may
has
the
2003).
Assistance
The
institutional
is
relief
on
may
debt
ODA
with
have
their
account.
may
get
and
ispoor
Netherlands
that
todonors
financed
the
attention
be
recently
redistribution
in
other
ultimately,
lift
flows,
larger
also
(Birdsall
relief
low
been
be
less
Reality
Committee
examine
very
To
the
aid
may
reduction
was
policies
measure
and
the
countries,
(ODA)
in
debts
the
does
may
of
possibility
This
prevent
the
aid
aid.
budgets.
Committee
also
unpaid
positive
this
Development.
from
than
the
also
is
case,
debt
to
Òdebt
extent
provide
arrangements
the
in
case
allocation:
not
according
also
may
and
financed
to
of
However,
ofbeen
have
apoverty
debt
may
and
other
if
the
of
relief
additionality
possible
good
before
between
countries
using
the
bring
the
be
overhangÓ
Williamson,
in
one
There
additional
only
the
if
imply
that
governance
(DAC),6
anext
stock
part
is
different
brought
the
World
OECD,
budgets
positive
government
it
could
reduction
debt
from
the
rather
additional
doCountries
to
that
the
is
countries
are
section.
reduces
recipient
1990s
ofBank
within
Òflow
may
the
not
with
ÒCountry
the
and
foreign
service
that
aid
see
again
debt
since
also
Ð2002).
than
qualify
from
of
leading
effectÓ
budgets
Ðand
this
for
the
relief
with
bethe net
with
particular
feature
be
additionality,
countries
levels
international
more
temporarily,
for
financing
difficult
HIPC
to
3long
on
contributions
included
from
of
Bank
debts.
private
reducing
The
are
loans,
deliveries
(ECAs).
followed
group
developing
has
Until
118
From:
FONDAD,
The
financed
twenty
multilateral
developing
granting
Netherlands
case
two
often
Debt
than
arrangements,
period.
the
ÒDebt
Financing
of
1997,
HIPC
have
In
and
ofRelief
debts
types
With
February
ingone
aid
the
of
international
creditors
ifDebt
other
of
to
years,
these
lack
the
countries:
Relief
debts
from
countries.
from
been
relief
the
itof
but
multilateral
achieve
budget.
debt
respect
community
to
countries,
has
Initiative.
it
beyond
brings
countries.
of
has
debt,
definition
two
donor
classification
from
Relief
aid
lowered,
they
this
the
bilateral
following
2004,
could
relief
FacilityÓ
been
overhang
additionality
that
Debt
on
dealing
been
cases
budgets
in
HIPC
The
ato
may
bilateral,
via
bilateral
countries
With
the
analleviating
effective
agreements
-Donor
www.fondad.org
still
to
the
extend
Relief
active
same
in
Myths
end
ultimately
debt
reduce
takeovers
Trust
there
agreements
Inthat
support
These
of
debt:
from
collectively
respect
aPerspective:
current
particular
sodeveloping
other
be
to
once-and-for-all
ODA
holds
relief
multilateral
in
of
and
that
in
Fund
is
debt
the
dealt
atwhat
beneficial
this
other
aid
multilateral
financed
in
debts
the
and
in
these
alleviating
no
to
Reality
words,
situation.
of
for
decreasing
state
the
there
benefit.
flows
of
is
the
inadverse
longer
Netherlands
has
additionality.
with
the
countries
debt
the
following
was
country
debt
more
latter,
with
the
highly
countries.
Paris
not
always
debt
insurance
former,
The
even
is
to
contributions
by
aid
for
debt
service
World
Paris
any
relief
complicated.
bilateral
noin
selection.
However,
been
other
and
export
Case
fashion.
According
all
buybacks
debt
Club,
level
if
indebted
the
aggregate
reason
may
relief
been
from
private.
Bank,
Club.
the
all
secured
types
ofless
countries
to
on
stocks
of
Netherlands
suffer
Yet,
credit
the
also
financed
bilateral
Netherlands
the
debt
this
the
private
export
debts
for
Since
over
is
ofindebted
Once
countries
of
to
informal
debt
There
Netherlands
asagencies
yet,
Debt
IFIs
private
and
relief
pleads
current
debt
the
fifteen
of
ain
the
for
debts
relief
positive
this
relief
or
World
aid
inadebt
would
via
ison
7 With
Geske
had
however,
changed
as
definition.
of
Dutch
Until
Paris
due
and
the
amounting
1997,
budgets,
ODA
From:
budget.
FONDAD,
01990
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Multilateral
Private
Figure
credit
export
Bilateral
Debt,
(millions
Source:
0.8
aid
no1991
in
not
fact
andDijkstra
Export
1997,
Club
this
HIPC
1990-2002
relationship
percent
1aavailable
drastically.
from
as
February
IOB
small
the
certain
that
precisely
Dutch
toDebt
1992
export
loan
aid
of(33
aforgiveness
This
the
Database
institutional
Credits
the
about
result
current
itDebt
loan
exception
119
of
percent
1993
forgiveness
Relief
change
apart
period)
budget
classifies
2004,
credit
GNP
180
because
with
of
1994
Relief
The
euros)
debt
and
from
and
million
on
-the
www.fondad.org
had
for
inrelief,
the
size
was
Myths
1995
became
commercial
environment
later
this
changed
Financed
1990,
substantial
debt
on
development
as
international
financed
ofand
1996
export
ODA.
Euros,
modality
the
fully
relief,
higher
as1997
extended
determination
Reality
This
from
can
Dutch
credits
credits
from
was
of1998
linked
consequences
percentages
cooperation
befully
i.e.
means
of
the
Dutch
ODA
aid
general
up
seen
debt
was
1999
Aid
for
as
to
definitions.
budget
that
aid
additional.
in2000
the
agreed
financed
relief
of
Budget,
2002.
the
budget
Figure
policies
Ðof
this
the
official
for
became
additionality
in
debt
2001
upon
classifies
Dutch
the
spite
debt
by
resources,7
from
1.Type
Inin
service
After
2002
fixed
amount
See
ODA
relief,
aid
1997,
of
aid
the
ofIOB,
asissue.
2002.
Figure
became
when
volume
2002.
regular
right
began
capitalised
export
firm
turn
and
been
maintained
writing
With
that
forgive
However,
rescheduled
implies
expenses
the
The
Finance
to
includes
had
does
firms
by
debt
ODA.
120
From:
FONDAD,
the
Dutch
still
NCM.
IOB
to
Debt
service
immediately
had
registered
the
debts
Ðnot
These
This
in
to
from
HIPC
1February
substantial
exploded,
credit
NCM
pay
Ministry
since
aid.
off
about
athat
evaluation
even
shows
Enhanced
classifying
be
to
debtor
aHIPC
made
the
subtract
Relief
case
has
compensation
means
will
large
in
to
the
two
Debt
restructured
so
parts
compensate
Ðpart
and
due
at
charges
own
that
agency,
in
Initiative,
a90
the
raises
that
full
amount
issues
cash
as
country
not
capitalised
least
long
of
from
Relief
leading
that
for
of
spite
percent
part
risk
2004,
HIPC
of
past
involved
the
appears
from
expenditure.
also
Finance
the
it
claim
debt
be
all
debt
budget,
time
athe
much
the
was
NCM,
part
of
insurance
charged
in
Initiative
maintained
the
repaid,
of
(IOB,
-Donor
www.fondad.org
amounts
1997
would
brought
toto
relief
in
full
service
of
these
aid
the
particular
Myths
question
not
service
on
creditor
the
ago,
less
had
NCM.
of
firms.
includes
anPerspective:
the
debt
onwards.
this
the
budget
2002).
exporting
be
forgiven
value
fact
never
the
Dutch
toall-time
to
debt
namely
and
ofthe
money
on
1980s
Given
Nevertheless,
remaining
to
premiums
allowed
developing
due;
service
began
its
compensate
due,
implies
Òdebt
Second,
debt
to
export
that
countries
Paris
the
Reality
ofaid
be
stocks
Ministry
for
This
the
have
Infirms
became
what
or
real
that
there
when
was
both
and
able
fore
relief
to
high
it
reliefÓ
more
full
by
the
early
Club
due.
is,
paid
budget.
raised
credits
that
bilateral
the
The
bethat
extent
rescheduled
value.
could
consists
it
the
the
country
was
to
years
available
the
finally
of
than
first,
that
nominal
implemented,
the
creditors
In
had
Ministry
to
Case
for
1990s.
Ministry
Netherlands
debt
repay
DAC
total
forgiven
no
that
aFinance
insured
be
the
NCM
The
asof
However,
Dutch
to
the
lot
export
2000-2002,
writing
definition
relief
for
foreseen
debt
of
because
ODA.
the
recognise
Dutch
is
compensate
Ministry
by
bill
value
debt
DAC
The
amount
NCM
of
the
for
and
earlier
of
ofattention
state
the
agreed
now
for
those
Dutch
and
debt
stocks.
credits
is
Most
part
never
Finance
presented
Netherlands
relief
the
Finance
had
has
down
case,
ofgranted
the
the
at
paid
fully.
the
ofdebts
of
Dutch
already
to
orthis
the
bill
ininjust
time
8 Insum,
practice
Geske
Dutch
letter
parliament
this
considered
general,
ODA
have
that
made
one
time
directive
should
unfair
countries,
claims
Bilateral
budgets.
With
is
the
loans
compensating
Otherwise,
first
it
assuming
amortisation
lower.
if
In
From:
FONDAD,
almost
is
the
ifrespect
can
NCM
DAC
November
point.
hollowing
been
it
this
and
Dijkstra
press
classifies
when
forgiven.
HIPC
toFebruary
it
be
competition
from
Therefore,
amortisation
would
question
in
definition
forgiveness
ofthe
one
again,
the
concerns
written
argument
which
self-supporting.
Aid
ahave
and
the
Debt
including
and
In
the
weird
can
to
debt
flow
2003,
DAC
never
Loans
reverse
121
the
out
first
implies
same
original
in2004,
not
this
states
premiums
the
However,
Relief
wonder
whether
as
asking
down
so
service
from
net
Parliament.
expectation
application
debts
(2002).
between
of
athat
pushed
be
Dutch
net
gross
aid
due
onplace.
bailing-out
parliamentary
own
the
since
ODA.
ODA
awould
paid
that
debtor
-both
www.fondad.org
whether
ODA.
loan
concessional
for
that,
long
the
received
in
Myths
risks
aid
relief
ODA,
registered
would
isthe
Furthermore,
This
firms
The
fully.
As
all
ECAs
this
the
interest
clarification
Ministry
The
would
higher
budget
time
to
be
Inbe
government
of
in
Jubilee
forgiveness
but
and
and
debt
national
directive
absence
isand
from
should
on
forgiveness
creditor
paid
aresponse,
the
ago,
Birdsall
there
be
paid,
Reality
motion
premiums,
reply
in
bilateral
with
on(Renard
relief
net
loan
and
DAC
absence
of
different
not
registered
Netherlands
contradiction
the
namely,
and
finance
of
Finance
export
has
ODA
there
debt
onyet
definition.8
obviously
from
is
so
toamortisation
of
this
the
basis
should
and
more
ofand
to
is
extended,
that
ask
has
the
to
of
aid
interest
relief
the
government
would
government
when
Williamson
credit
European
their
treated
amortisation
be
not
forgiveness
make
debt
fundamentally,
should
asthe
been
ODA
of
loans,
net
Cassimon,
DAC,
be
has
anaims
increased.
ODA
what
it
with
be
than
government
definition
an
classified
relief,
unrecoverable
imaginary
ODA
kept
More
pointed
agencies
on
and
members
was
bail
differently
twice:
anend
to
the
lead
could
an
(aid)
aid
would
without,
wrote
have
then
onon
in
clear
avoid
and
2000).
toto
out
EU
situation
should
hold.
out
ofas
also
(ECAs)
aid
when
beato in
on end this
9topped
In practice,
up by thetheamortisation
annual development
paymentscooperation
due. If these budget
payments
of 0.8arepercent
forgiven,
GNP thes
is
eamounts aretonot
According
amortisation theforthcoming
amounts
DAC and
rules,thisgross
andisthe
corrected
ODAactual
is then budget
by aincreased
counteracting
remainsbyatthethe flow
forgiven
0.8sopercent.
that in th
eendsothe
higher
debt
increase
DAC
means
that
not
on
were
does
stocks
the
norm
continued
decreased
In
promised
loans.
announced
Ðbilateral
development
other
from
additional
but
forgiveness
forgiven
122
From:
FONDAD,
forgiveness
net
have
definition
expect
aid
the
Debt
service
one
financed
not
of
far
the
this
HIPCs,
HIPC
registered
Netherlands,
of
context
The
ODA
budget
0.8
amounts
February
been
registered
assumes
classify
Ðto
general
before
Relief
after
as
the
aid
forgiveness
Dutch
nineteen
to
Debt
isthis
percent
forgive
cooperation),
does
onwould
of
paid
be
from
intention
loans
regular
again
principals,
principals.
would
of
export
1997.9
1997
are
1999.
from
Relief
that
repaid,
Minister
not
budget,
2004,
net
ODA,
debt
as
the
is
have
in
the
net
until
shrunk
GNP.
90
in
countries
much
equal
ODA.
have
(Figure
done
aclassify
ODA
the
donors
HIPC
aid.
credits.
however,
is
service
aid
Yet,
percent
these
-Donor
www.fondad.org
been
ODA.
to
this
Forgiveness
and
smaller
Myths
asThis
absence
not
1997
The
reduced
for
this
ati.e.
budget,
After
to
Initiative,
grant
the
compared
paid.
This
forgive
1).
HIPC
completion
this
Perspective:
0.8
counted
accounting
latter
almost
Development
that
as
due.
all
of
is
Many
and
does
share
debt
1997,
forgiveness
ODA,
than
percent
of
appears
the
remaining
countries.
done
debt
Conversely,
forms
despite
have
Reality
aid
relief,
not
stocks
these
holds,
zero,
of
relief
torelief
as
budget
of
the
the
creditor
at
adebt
point.
loans
the
mention
ODA.
is
of
forgiveness
ofbecause
to
Cooperation
special
decision
costs
amounts
The
principals
the
forgiveness
that
consistent
relief
in
stocks
isGNP.
case
this
be
to
service
on
For
Ifnot
has
had
Case
ifinvolved
fact
particular,
Since
fully
below
countries
the
the
are
and
some
inof
debt
status
thus
involved
already
onfull
paying
point;
included
that
which
case
not
to
on
this
correct.
only
bilateral
has
countries
the
service
relief
with
of
become
the
aid
yet
part
stock
within
are
ofin
remaining
this
fixed
have
for
stock
been
Netherlands
this
if
for
extent
the
loans
indue.
financed
does
they
of
the
would
The
from
of
Figure
rules
debt
aid
(the
Dutch
itThis
not1,
do
Geske
have
regular
multilateral
Development
make
However,
usual
defended
those
and
Fund
for
policy
among
countries.
between
the
to
down
reducing
donors
not
In
write
costs
Netherlands
ODA
suffering
series
These
are
4their
The
conditionality.
From:
FONDAD,
Adverse
guarantee
sum,
Ðto
aid
GNP
other
bilateral
seem
definition:
unable
last
been
their
have
Dijkstra
generous
definition
years
recipient
down
involved
debts
debt
HIPC
probably
contribute
of
aid
budget,
was
donors,
maintaining
it
February
since
its
the
to
problematic
presented
reduced
destinations
from
debt
Effects
contributions
In
is
and
to
service
Debt
flows
Cooperation
(1999-2001)
growing.
be
shows
should
debt
position
ÒadditionalityÓ
bilateral
addition,
channel
important
pay
Ð123
the
an
eventually
should
debt
reschedulings,
they
contributed
countries
in
debt
Before
Relief
Dutch
of
2004,
relief.
the
to
appropriate
that
and
ofDutch
the
be
due.
byissue
that
the
problems
can
However,
the
relief
Conditionality
aswww.fondad.org
by
amount
to
not
written
can
contributions
in
form
grant
this
-the
even
since
this
regular
that
helping
to
contributions
only
concept.
pointing
the
maintenance
Myths
The
the
from
write
be
Dutch
of
HIPC
the
to
of
could
on
urged
policy
multilateral
of
volume.
official
charged
already
expected
Ðand
be
it
contributions
absence
use
should
down
the
the
alow-debt
export
then
HIPC
aid
debt
lending
off
Initiative,
government
to
called
was
re-allocation
InReality
to
of
be
HIPC
other
observed
at
guarantee
that
implies
their
Ðnot
Initiative
practice,
the
fixed
relief
This
of
aid
to
achieved
for
not
ofInitiative
creditors
credits
the
Dutch
have
the
additional
countries
volume
debt
aid
bilateral
growing
would
these
amoney.
be
channel.
is
bad
moment
toasthe
long
HIPC
as
been
to
aredistribution
of
budgets.
registered
Minister
another
problems
pay
additionality
0.8
redistribution
loans,
by
of
ÒadditionalÓ
have
contributions.
the
ofÒadditionalÓ.
are
time,
most
Trust
financed
aid
changing
countries
that
the
percent
to
aid
the
isdonors
by
Dutch
HIPC
The
IFIs
been
also
budget
high-debt
way
and
The
full
its
important
for
changing
money
IFIs
and
evidenced
countries
Fund
Dutch
asTrust
in
government
available
in
forced
that
case
tothat
from
of
does
the
ODA.
value
ofwhich
fact
while
toeffort
of
during
from
also
GNP,
of
This
flows
the
ofthe
flows
boils
to
are
in
of
the
condition
Initiative
programme
to
Basically,
the
set
strategy
PRSP)
Furthermore,
Òinterim
HIPC
international
period
longer
country
PRSP,
reforms
conditions
1990s
Strangely
framework.
was
that
ineffective.
had
increased
can
consensus.
ineffectiveness
illustrates
In
embraced
Bank,
conditionality
change
bilateral
demonstrated
good
124
From:
FONDAD,
doDebt
1998,
IMF
Enhanced
for
reached
already
therefore
Initiative),
it
governance
soin
the
and
1998),
HIPC
isFebruary
fixed
regarding
reaching
meeting
and
was
for
periodÓ
the
Relief
for
had
used
country
also
enough,
ex
bilateral
aid
required
the
for
In
Debt
must
in
useless
intended
this.
another
HIPC
reducing
countries
at
Governments
ante
Dutch
Assessing
which
to
debt
three
to
community
be
fact,
would
first
to
debt
far
academic
was
three
the
of
be
in
from
Relief
the
do
(between
be
considered
2004,
structural
Initiative,
to
implement
must
in
conditionality
relief
more
policy
Minister
was
ineffective.
able
the
countries
years
so
conditions
on
relief
to
policymakers
aid
be
three
HIPC
decision
be
roughly
ato
poverty
years,
with
must
also
track
draw
Aid
another
focused
past.
-Donor
www.fondad.org
evidenced
can
elaborate
circles
do
policy.
to
generally
Myths
was
in
Initiative
the
conditions.
years
are
so.
Report
carry
civil
begin
be
the
execute
up
as
for
adjustment.
order
but
with
the
Aid
Perspective:
that
to
however,
point.
(Poverty
decision
sure
for
thus
conditions
The
inconsistent
study
on
and
PRSP.
(Collier
Development
The
From
have
to
became
same
for
also
out
would
society
to
by
an
than
of
those
there
to
it.
implement
broad
Reality
reach
athat
more
report
evaluated
Countries
implement
Progress
IMF
the
concluding
then
good
successfully
reach
number
period,
broadly
The
ancountries
Reduction
and
Apart
those
thus
ÒfloatingÓ,
should
The
debt
agreement.
comprehensive
et
acceptance
Enhanced
World
the
additional
participation.
interim
ex
case
on,
policies
The
completion
became
the
al.,
with
Cooperation
become
original
from
of
ante
policies
completion
Reports,
relief
broad
accepted
Dutch
Case
past
had
the
of
Bank
bethis
decision
more
the
that
Strategy
1997;
period
implementing
because
HIPC
the
that
an(World
completed
to
strategy
and
more
ofperformance.
depending
The
original
consensus
of
condition
given
conventional
exagreement
HIPC
elaborate
points
only
academic
Netherlands
basis
the
soselective.
than
Killick,
Initiative
the
had
toante
point,
point.
is
Paper,
that
they
maintain
Netherlands
infor
ifnopolicy
inanthey
of
HIPC
this
on
was
the
were
with
IMF
and
the
a1998)
With
the
farreaching
10 Soft loans from multilateral banks have a ten-year grace period, so debt serv
payments begin after that period. In Nicaragua, for example, loans from the IFIs
ice
increased
were vetoedsince by the1990.
US This
between implies
1983 that
and 1990,
debt service
and theirduevolumeincreasesalmostalmost
annually
every
during
year
Geske
Despite
PRSP
additional
long
development
Basically,
recipient
may
resources
relief
receive
part
that
2003).
Enhanced
The
actually
comprehensiveness
were
to
support).
scheduling
multilateral
due;
volume
debt
In
requirement
policies
deficit,
provoking
government
expended
From:
FONDAD,
the
all
beservice
HIPC
and
after
relief
debt
of
would
not
if
Dijkstra
HIPC
2000-2010.
involved,
concerns
This
IFIs
from
of
this,
additional
relief
debt
February
its
HIPC
Initiative
paid
may
possibly
little
relief
countries.
as
Debt
these
higher
exto
that,
there
not
of
expenditure.
Debt
cooperation
may
are
development
accompanying
compared
debts
service
that
imply
the
ante
Initiative.
to
before,
multilateral
125
the
from
have
service
ÒspendÓ
debts
still
no
cases,
on
Relief
PRSPs
are
does
even
particular
inflation,
2004,
Dutch
of
must
(depending
condition
poorest
money.
longer
is
higher
the
the
been
may
three
On
the
due
not
debt
with
that
hold
or
computed
even
may
annually
debt
these
-social
www.fondad.org
government
in
top
Paris
even
banks
This
paid
Initiative
if
increases,
Myths
required
always
As
forthcoming
government
general.
arguments
countries.
relief
the
were
for
also
debt
became
of
creditors,
bilateral
relief
or
for
the
lead
resources
on
may
Club
in
increased
sectors
the
situation
part
as
may
and
not
increase
service.
be
how
provide
IOB
the
also
itself
ato
welcomed
participatory
the
substitution
in
paid
does
be
Reality
paid
of
creditors
fixed
for
the
Enhanced
against
evaluation
absence
increased
expenditure
Afor
the
grants
(and
at
occur
so
basis
the
first
example
ten
also
not
deficit
additional
does
without
before,
due
The
the
far
past
percentage
Paris
example,
not
poverty
the
years
free
in
for
setting
of
to
HIPC
increases.
cost
(Berthelemy,
HIPC
and
not
must
concerned
debt
replaced
countries
requirement
for
concludes,
this
take
the
because
isprocesses
Dutch
debt
the
Club
resources
and
important
always
relief
before,10
of
Initiative.
now
reduction
financed)
resources
regular
service
if
particular
conditions
country
relief
over
aof
other
relief.
relief
bilateral
because
be
higher
bythat
debt
the
free
debt
on
paid
debt
2001).
aasthe
budget
and
ofservice
reason
aid
(IOB,
loan
does
large
under
tothe
If
service
have
athat
Not
of
that
service
for
the
debt
The
not
the
is
the
11second
money
country
must
proceeds
HIPC
projects
Adeficit
termed
aid11
of
either
particular
purchased
unable
having
have
inappropriate
money.
and
conditions
the
practice.
past
beneficial
The
setting
discussed
relief
that
has
policies
policies,
on
PRSP
As
are
126
From:
FONDAD,
Double
economic
the
debt
lack
for
taking
same
third
little
most
Debt
sell
Initiative
been
will
two
process.
Ðtwice.
HIPC
bad
Special
in
to
made
Instead
may
the
must
aor
relief,
of
February
inand
from
reason
aid
factors
if
important
Relief
tying
these
practice
the
from
repay
too
Even
be
argument
above.
atthey
donor
projects
their
to
effects
conditions
even
effect.
performance.
first,
Debt
local
growth.
the
For
purchase
money,
avoided:
their
form
optimistic
destinations
the
second
Programme
the
of
worse,
means
goods
forces
is
conditions
these
wrong
have
from
Relief
example,
governance
losses,
Furthermore,
are
2004,
currency
cost
accepting
relief
it
that
of
donor
this
against
One
intax
to
and
perverse
responsible
not
is
ahas
that
donor
in
policy
loans.
lending
there
are
to
determining
such
of
be
is
-Donor
www.fondad.org
income,
setting
has
can
time?
that
These
the
of
country.
or
donors
on
aid
convinced
been
Myths
aconditions
expenditure
carried
donors
that
donors
be
are
(projects
donor
countriesÕ
countries
since
been
Assistance
perhaps
their
these
therefore
islocal
conditions
This
in
the
Perspective:
used
decision:
the
effects.
two
shown
first
no
governments
and
possibly
conditions
and
general
condemned
sure
for
donors
set
provides
it
out,
Recipient
points
incorrect
same
guarantee
setting
factors
government
market,
for
themselves
Reality
they
creditors
that
implies
set
or
the
conditions
to
be
that
for
export
particular
to
or
loans.
Earlier
but
their
supplies)
is
seldom
spend
at
for
to
recommended
termed
fact
domestic
Africa
debt
of
probably
The
foreign
and
would
for
by
conditions
ineffective,
are
the
more
countries
donors
expectations
that
the
particular
conditions
policies
goods.
donors
expectations
now
This
that
Case
the
more
debt
relief
research
not
impose
risk
bad
for
have
Òdouble
(SPA).
original
likely
the
projects.
for
pose
political
exchange
donor
and
is
setting
likely
these
still
of
onmistakes
relief
donor
the
The
of
in
had
are
double
will
is
real
(Dollar
the
social
creditors
new
ahold
the
In
in
goods
as
for
demonstrated
same
recipient
then
tyingÓ
or
that
are
greater
more
(aid)
then
use
to
Netherlands
could
the
may
have
already
conditions
sanctions
with
context
mistakes
debt
factors
tying
carry
the
amount
requires
to
of
the
for
and
effect
case
form
ofright
loan,
which
be
this
the
the
government
of
out
ofofthat
the
aid the
Geskeexample,
Svensson,
agreement
debt,
partially,
these
trade
governments
civil
own
ÒendorsedÓ
however,
endorsement
approved
reduced
chance
actual
not
their
Initiative
less
three
actually
The
according
imposed.
individual
relationship,
collectively.
but
effective.
NGOs
admitted
this
the
IMF
for
From:
FONDAD,
strategies.
IOB
really
government
second
it
international
admission
with
likely
such
led
Dijkstra
conditions
earlier
liberalisation.
society.
investigated
interest
countries
HIPC
toFebruary
influence.
still
evaluation
the
recipient
detracted
did
They
to
the
1998).
with
influence
to
asorthe
by
interested
as
cause
donors,
Partly
Debt
tothe
and
chances
that
(IOB,
earlier
seems
Jubilee
aid
additional
measures,
staffs
soon
are
or
The
of
127
IMF
elaborate
The
that
set
For
approval.
examined,
HIPC
approval
Relief
Ifcommunity
may
strategies
for
they
countries
of
full
2004,
Indifficult
not
HIPC
owing
and
idea
showed
from
countries
as
out
2003).
who
countries
this
for
the
numerous
bePRSP
of
Mozambique,
the
research
2000
Initiative.
The
in
possible.
applied
have
World
to
have
-Initiative
www.fondad.org
implemented
for
was
the
their
real
strategy,
country
to
ameasures
reason,
influencing
ineffectiveness
of
Myths
Enhanced
The
that
differences
do
and
PRSP
little
pressure
that
was
example,
IFIs,
will
an
that
PRSPs
Bank,
did
participation
felt
in
to
artificial
are
three
degree
is
because
EURODAD,
the
interest
approved
and
and
would
Without
the
impose
could
countries
PRSPs
not
NGOs
be
that
many
In
under
may
not
and
effect
guarantees
that
for
HIPC
fact
Reality
but
to
field
implemented.
PRSP,
brought
December
byonly
observe
of
the
bedid
ÒapprovedÓ.
that
maintained
qualify
were
actual
of
countries
example
do
would
they
sanctions
it
severe
often
granting
Initiative
that
ownership,
country
in
waivers.
due
taken
strategy
of
the
because
sostay
studies
and
iswould
(IOB,
they
observed
continuing
not
had
policy
to
with
only
any
strategies
sanctions
conflicting
greater
in
2000
only
for
what
pressure
because
to
bear
really
the
not
had
ownership,
the
should
onmany
write
difference
2003).
In
donors
that
Later,
undo
participation
have
In
carried
because
the
incosmetically
required
and
the
conditions
track
political
been
not
two
between
by
interest
practice,
donor
particular,
exemptions
they
Enhanced
the
are
deserve
ofin
the
and
to
also
government
are
international
betowith
NGOs
had
out
dogiven
interests
aNicaragua
be
out
it
aid
reach
effects
own
were
it
seldom
not
coordination,
high
in
to
much
of
what
inthe
was
offor
is
it,
their
abe
HIPC
the
act
oralso
of
the
anoroftoin
to
real
12 Donors can of course still support the poor people in these countries with ba
dpolicies
these
interests
whole
interested
Therefore,
guarantees
poverty,
apply
inevitable
poor
have
will
countries
loans
governance.
really
The
selection.
agreement
small
relief
programme
is
and
implies
adverse
giving
thus
the
another
concessional
128
From:
FONDAD,
therefore
IMF
beneficiary
Fund
Debt
policies,
received
also
deserve
countries.
considered
greater
will
new
HIPC
remains
is
selective
aand
plays
that
selection
reason
February
and
in
stamp
is
Relief
ofDebt
continue
are
no
with
IMF
aid,
inleast
although
that
continue,
As
for
practice
Such
bad
one
longer
at
there
programme
finance
the
selectivity.
it
ahighly
loan,
tied
and
these
other
with
of
for
countries
even
crucial
creditor,
the
of
from
Relief
governance,
the
or
adverse
in
2004,
reduction
in
approval
likely
those
to
such
is
proposing
two
in
to
will
tied
the
but
which
same
government
this
countries
indebted,
also
countries.
and
the
ato
areceive
theory
policy
aid
-Donor
www.fondad.org
donors,
allocation
role
more
finance
conflict
poor
where
eventually
selection
much
time
aid
to
Myths
receiving
is
in
the
earlier
Debt
on
(debt
ofPerspective:
conditions.
bring
but
not
countries
in
importantly,
allocation.
that
countries.
the
conditions,
more
IMF
larger
gatekeeper
countries
poverty
where
genuine
the
and
although
in
relief
Amaintaining
(White
they
certain.
of
relief
setting
has
new
IMF
this
the
power
aid
cycle
will
of
Reality
debt
do
interest.
corruption
multilateral
will
new
an
PRGF
loans
IMF
(Dijkstra
is
participation
so.
than
with
and
selectivity
only
Donors
that
and
the
to
relief
of
interest
for
Donors
ofDijkstra,
Furthermore,
it
in
foreign
frees
no
The
nobudget
Highly
agreement
belonger
others
debt
bad
this
can
donor
conditions
is
itself
be
international
are
longer
This
Case
corrupt
can
will
unlikely
is
policies
put
the
be
look
and
relief,
adverse
performing
indebted
aid
in
and
community
rife,
do.
then
paid.
conflict
support),
into
ofsoat
to
way
provides
support
Evans,
ÒuseÓ
does
reaching
brings
2003).
disbursements.12
bilateral
the
and
as
necessary
Because
an
start
for
the
practice.
that
those
aid
and
The
long
not
end
Netherlands
not
it
countries
finance,
a2003).
debt
This
maintains
IMF
well
the
as
and
bad
IMF
while
longterm
donors
exist,
if
ato
asfor
with
aand
new
governments
combat
new
debt
be
debtwill
This the
is of
5Geske
This
Initiative:
loans,
of
Initiative.
solved
All
around
the
made.
poorest
just
budgets;
written
¥definition
policy
aGiven
donors
Berthelemy,
References
seriously.
Reform
Debt
Birdsall,
HIPC
Paper
Helsinki,
From:
FONDAD,
Conclusions
AAll
The
Debt
result
debt
aid
of
preceding
mechanism
chapter
like
Relief,
matter?
Dijkstra
These
IDA
IMF
writing
debt
that
presented
HIPC
thereby
by
this
the
relief
conditions.
and
IncentivesÓ,
relief,
allocation
countries;
off,
February
ofAugust.
the
loans
should
commercial
Nancy,
HIPC
relief
of
chances
creditors
Debt
The
points
include:
the
Jean-Claude
has
no
Helsinki.
The
Initiative,
pages,
must
down
ODA
to129
perpetuating
fact
and
first
Initiative
should
longer
problems
at
Relief
analysed
no
the
Stijn
Debt
2004,
onthe
inisPaper
to
be
on
for
the
longer
that
some
creditors,
export
the
poorest
begin
two
alikely
created
bad
Game
become
counts
success
Claessens
-WIDER
www.fondad.org
conditionality
need
(2001),
case
analysed
Myths
three
donors
imply
the
recommendations
loans
to
provide
to
and
debt
credit
toconsider
countries
UNU-WIDER
Debt
third
grants;
to
as
of
around
of
Donor
and
problematic
that
continue.
change
write
should
ÒHIPC
continue
problems,
ensure
ODA
debt
and
the
in
Relief
long-term
debts
Reality
implies
Ðdebt
this
Ishac
Behavior
aid
down
relief
HIPC
Debt
associated
international
not
in
should
these
Conference
that
that
Conference,
toDiwan
problems
in
for
line
chapter,
the
on
be
Initiative
Relief
aspects
that
extend
general.
finance
official
on
possible
changes
bad
charged
should
be
inlimited
with
bilateral
adverse
given
(2001),
AfricaÓ,
with
loans;
and
onare
we
oflong
large
the
decisionmaking
to
Inwithout
have
creditors,
to
are
hope
changes
Policy
additionality
the
not
the
DAC
selection
aid
ÒWill
amounts
have
aid
grim
HIPCloans;
likely
been
that beento
as ofinbe
Birdsall,
Delivering
Center
Economics,
Collier,
Willem
World
Dollar,
or
Dijkstra,
Relief
Relief,
Dooley,
NBER
Easterly,
Countries
Debt
Felgenhauer,
1696.
of
Law,
Hanlon,
Journal
Achievement
IDA,
IMF
International
Report
Ministry
IOB
Bolivia,
and
Evaluation
130
From:
FONDAD,
Failure
Law
Growth
and
Worldbank,
(2002),
(2003),
Zambia,
Debt
Working
ReliefÓ,
Vol.
Washington
Development,
HIPC
for
Gunning
in
and
of
to
David
Policy
Michael
Joseph
of
IDA
February
Paul,
of
Jamaica,
Relief
Nancy
Geske
Nicaragua:
William
Become
39,
the
onIOB
Global
Washington
of
Group,
Moral
International
291,
Department,
Debt
(2002a),
of
(2002b),
Nederlands
Foreign
Results
Paper
Grant
Debt
and
Structural
In:
No.
Financial
International
US
Patrick
(1997),
and
(2000),
Long-Term
Washington
and
P.
D.C.
Policy
Evaluations
from
Relief
Heavily
HazardÓ,
Congress,
2004,
Development/Institute
Jakob
The
(2002),
World
1,
Mozambique,
Relief:
Vol.
Operations
(1994),
No.
(2000),
John
Trevor
Affairs,
of
Case
pp.
The
aHIPC
D.C.
World
Guillaumont,
ÒRedesigning
4963,
ÒHow
Schuldverlichtingsbeleid
and
International
Ministry
-Donor
www.fondad.org
25,
Svensson
Development,
Institution
Williamson
Adjustment
Indebted?
221-255.
Development,
Enhanced
External
Myths
Study
ÒHow
In:
Initiative:
D.C.
From
Evans
ÒA
ÒIMF
Washington
Operations
No.
Bank,
much
Financial
292,
Washington
The
Perspective:
Evaluation
Retrospective
Columbia
Nicaragua,
Did
and
IMF
9,
for
Off-Market
of
(1998),
(2003),
Debt
Hague.
Policy
Washington
HIPC
Debt
pp.
Heavily
Reviewing
Foreign
Reality
with
Gold
Sylviane
ConditionalityÓ,
Programs?,
the
Advisory
Vol.
Debt
must
Vol.
Status
Institution
D.C.
Evaluation
1399-1407.
Journal
Initiative
Sustainability,
for
IOB
D.C.
and
Brain
to
What
Results
Department
Peru,
30,
Relief,
The
Indebted
Gold
be
12,
Affairs,
aCommission
International
Evaluation
on
Operations
Guillaumont
D.C.
Two
of
New
Explains
No.
Cancelled?Ó,
Case
Deese
Macroeconomics
the
of
No.
Tanzania,
Sales:
Implementation,
1990-1999,
ofwith
Decades
Department,
Aid
10,
Transnational
and
Advisory
Debt
6,
of
International
(IOB),
Poor
The
(2002),
In:
Architecture,
pp.
the
the
of
Questions
IMF
Case
CrisisÓ,
(2000),
Hague.
and
of
Uganda
Dutch
1677-
877-901.
Netherlands
Success
In:
and
Commission,
IOB
Studies
JanIMF
Debt
Debt
of
Geske257-286.
Killick,
and
New
OED
Initiative:
Department,
Renard,
Measuring
Sachs,
CountriesÓ,
pp.
White,
Development:
World
Why,
From:
York/Toronto.
FONDAD,
the
York.
(2003),
Oxford
Dijkstra
Bank
HIPC
Jeffrey
Howard
Political
Robrecht
February
Tony,
Aid,
(1998),
Debt
The
An
Washington
Brookings
University
Beyond
and
131
with
OED
University
D.
Heavily
Relief
and
2004,
Economy
(2002),
Geske
Review
Assessing
Ramani
Conditionality,
Danny
Papers
D.C.
-Press
www.fondad.org
Indebted
Dijkstra
Myths
(25160),
of
ÒResolving
Gunatilaka
Cassimon
Policy
Antwerp,
on
Aid:
forand
Economic
Poor
(2003),
the
What
Operations
Reality
Change,
(2000),
Routledge,
the
World
and
Countries
Antwerp.
Works,
Debt
Activity
Programme
Ana
Bank,
Routledge,
On Marr
Evaluation
Crisis
What
the
London.
(HIPC)
Oxford/New
No.
(1998),
Pitfalls
Aid
DoesnÕt,
of1,and
London/
Debt
Low-Income
Aid
of
and
Will the
HIPC
Edited Debt
byHIPC
Relief:
Jan JoostMyths
debt relief
Teunissen
andinitiative
Reality
and Agefinally
Akkermansolve the debt problem that the Hig
Indebted
ahly
Towards
programme?
African
countryÕs
the
countries
Poorend
external
Countries
ofprompted
thedebt
1980s,
areremains
afacing
few
concern
international
sustainable
since
about
thethe
1980s?
after
experts
rising
Is to
the there
debt
completion
advocate
problems
any guarantee
ofofthepoor
effectiveHIPC
that
deb
trelief to low-income countries. Early FONDAD publications contributed to putting
In
countries.
pressure
1996, the
on western
international
policymakers
community
to consider
introducedsubstantial
the Heavily
debtIndebted
relief Poor
for poor
Countr
Initiative
ies
HIPCs in thetoParis
provide
Cluba and
permanent
bring their
exit from
external
the repeated
debts todebt
sustainable
reschedulings
levels.ofHo
in 2004
wever,
This bookthepresents
HIPC debta thorough
problem analysis
has stillofnotthebeen
successes
solved.and failures of the HIPC
Issues
Initiative
addressed
and provides
includeathewidequestion
range ofofsuggestions
whether debtofrelief
what needs
shouldtobebelinked
done. to
sustainability,
IMF conditionality, the (mis)use
the need of foraid
including
funds for
domestic
debt relief
debt inandassessments
repayment of expor
debt
tcredits,
With
Initiative
a view
andtotothe
the
thebailing-out
Millennium
future of Development
of IMF loanscountries,
low-income Goals
by donor
and warns
countries.
the book
thatrelates
debt relief
the HIPCcan on
provide a fraction of the funds required for reducing poverty and avoiding a new
ly
The
build-up
book spells
of unsustainable
out how genuine
debt. debt relief could contribute to poverty reductio
nand Hague,
The
FONDAD
www.fondad.org
economicThegrowth
Netherlands
in poor developing countries.