G-20 Data Gaps Initiatives

G-20 Data Gaps Initiatives
—An International Response to
the Global Financial Crisis
Regional Workshop on Strategic Statistical Planning:
Towards a Stronger ASEAN Community Statistical System
ASEAN Secretariat
Jakarta, Indonesia
(November 28–29, 2012)
He Qi
IMF Statistics Department
The views expressed herein are those of the author and should not necessarily be attributed to the IMF,
its Executive Board, or its management
Plan of the Presentation
 Objectives of the G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
 The Gaps
 Implementation and Consultation
 Feedback
 Challenges
 History has demonstrated that crises create new
demands for financial and economic data:
This crisis is no different.
 The IMF, along with other international agencies, is
working along two tracks to address the data challenges:
Addressing new data needs arising from the crisis,
Making data more accessible and timely through the
Principal Global Indicators (PGI) website.
G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
 Through the G-20 process in April 2009, the IMF and the
Financial Stability Board (FSB) were asked to:
“explore gaps and provide appropriate proposals for
strengthening data collection before the next meeting of
G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors.”
 At the Spring Meetings 2009, the IMF’s International
Monetary and Financial Committee welcomed this work
with the FSB:
“to provide better indicators of systemic risks and address
data gaps, and underline the importance of international
cooperation in preventing such systemic risks.”
G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
 The IMF’s Statistics Department is working with the Inter-Agency
Group on Economic and Financial Statistics (IAG) to coordinate
this work.1
 The IMF, along with FSB, organized a very well attended Users’
Conference in July 2009 at IMF Headquarters (primarily financial
stability experts from G-20 countries and international agencies).
in 2008, the IAG is chaired by the IMF and consists of the Bank
for International Settlements (BIS), the European Central Bank (ECB), Eurostat,
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the
United Nations, and the World Bank.
Four Themes of the Data Gaps Initiative
 The IMF/FSB report to the G-20 on the financial crisis and
information gaps, presented at end-October 2009,
identified a need to address four main interrelated areas:
Build-up of risk in the financial sector.
Cross-border financial linkages.
Vulnerability of domestic economies to shocks.
Improving communication
Overview of 20 Recommendations to
Close Data Gaps
 Twenty recommendations were proposed under the DGI in
the 2009 IMF/FSB Report (see Annex I).
 From an implementation standpoint, they can be divided
into two categories (as described in the next slide):
 Those recommendations for which the
conceptual/statistical frameworks exist and ongoing
collection needs enhancement.
Those recommendations for which conceptual/statistical
frameworks need development.
There Exist Conceptual/
Statistical Frameworks and
Ongoing Collection
Conceptual Statistical Framework
Needs Further Development
Build-up of Risk in # 2 Financial Soundness
the Financial Sector Indicators (FSIs)
#5 Credit Default Swaps
#7 Securities
# 3 Tail Risk in the Financial System
#4 Aggregate Leverage and
Maturity Mismatches;
#6 Structured Products
Financial Linkages
#8 and # 9 Global Network
Connections and Systemically
Important Global Institutions
# 13 and #14 Financial and
Nonfinancial Corporations’ Cross
Border Exposures
# 10, #11, #12 Coordinated
Portfolio Investment Survey,
International Banking Statistics,
International Investment
Vulnerability of
#15 Institutional Sector Accounts
Domestic Economies # 17 Government Finance
#16 Distributional Information
to Shocks
# 18 Public Sector Debt
#19 Real Estate Prices
Communication of
Official Statistics
#20 Principal Global Indicators
L-29 Economic and Financial Statistics in the Context of Global Financial Crisis
HQ 11.06/8
Build-up of Risk in the Financial Sector
 Improve coverage of indicators of financial health and
soundness of financial institutions, the so-called Financial
Soundness Indicators.
 Develop measures of aggregate leverage and maturity
mismatches in the financial system.
 Improve:
1) Coverage of credit default swaps, not least to improve
understanding of risk transfers within this market.
Disclosure requirements for complex structured products
(IOSCO), and
The availability of standardized data on securities.
Cross-border Financial Linkages
 Better understand cross-border financial linkages of
systematically important global financial institutions.
 Strengthen data collection on cross-border banking
flows and positions:
 Coordinated Portfolio Investment Survey, BIS
International Banking Statistics, and IIP data.
 Monitoring and measuring cross-border exposures
of nonfinancial, and financial, corporations.
 International exposures of nonbank financial
Vulnerability of Domestic Economies to Shocks
 Strengthen sectoral coverage of national balance
sheets, flow of funds, and sectoral data more generally
(and the distributional information).
 Promote timely and cross-country standardized and
comparable government finance statistics.
 Compile and disseminate public sector debt.
 Disseminate more comparable data on real estate
Improving Communication
 Improve the communication of official
statistics and close gaps in availability of data
to users:
Making data more accessible and timely for
a wider audience through the Principal
Global Indicators site.
Principal Global Indicators (1)
 Principal Global Indicators , on IMF.org, launched in April 2009:
An inter-agency initiative with the BIS, ECB, Eurostat, OECD,
World Bank, and UN.
Brings together data for G-20 economies and five non-G-20 FSB
One-stop shop =
 Focus is on systemically important economies:
Timely data on the financial, government, external, and real
Links to central banks, financial regulatory agencies, and other
key websites;
Principal Global Indicators (2)
Access to data from international sources; and
G-20 official website provides link to PGI.
 The PGI continues to innovate:
In March 2012, the GDP growth rate for G-20 economies as a
group was added; and
In August, data on sectoral balance sheets and portfolio
investment were added.
In November, countries’ coverage is expanded to include
Austria, Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg, and Sweden. The PGI
now includes data for the G-20 and economies that are not
members of the G-20 identified by the IMF as having
systemically important financial sectors.
Principal Global Indicators
Principal Global Indicators
Principal Global Indicators
Principal Global Indicators
Principal Global Indicators
Implementation and Consultation
 The implementation of the DGI involves:
 A great deal of collaboration among
international institutions (IAG).
 A consultation process with the G-20 economies
Eurostat, IMF
(FSB/IMF Senior Officials Conferences, and IMF
World Bank
bilateral visits and regional conferences).
 FSB/IMF reporting to the G-20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank
 Communication process (UNSC side events, IMF Annual Meetings
Seminars, PGI Website).
2009, three progress reports (May 2010, June 2011, and September 2012) have been
submitted. These reports are available on the IMF website “IMF and the Group of Twenty”
G-20 Regional and Global Conferences
 As part of the continuing consultation process, the IMF’s
Statistics Department, in collaboration with the FSB Secretariat
and the members of the IAG, organized four regional
conferences and one global conference for G-20 senior officials
during the first half of 2012.
 The regional conferences were hosted by:
 Bank of Mexico (March 2012),
 Undersecretariat of the Treasury of Turkey (April 2012),
 Banque de France (April 2012), and
 People’s Bank of China (May 2012)
 The global conference was hosted by the FSB at the BIS
headquarters in Basel, Switzerland (June 2012).
Feedback from the Global Conference (1)
 There continues to be strong support for the G-20 DGI.
 Comprehensive and high-quality data are essential for good policies.
 There is a need to improve the sharing of information relevant for early
warning and policymaking.
 Complexity of the crisis meant addressing data gaps as a global initiative,
hence the need for outreach, networking, and call for the G-20 to support
the initiative with adequate resources.
 There is demand for the datasets being enhanced and developed under
the DGI for analysis and policymaking, including for:
 Financial stability,
 External vulnerability,
 Fiscal sustainability, and
 Domestic interconnectedness.
Feedback from the Global Conference (2)
 Data needs are increasing due to links with other G-20
initiatives and emerging regulatory/supervisory work,
 Legal entity identifiers (LEI),
 Work of the Basel Committee on Risk Concentration
 IOSCO work on derivatives,
 and FSB work on shadow banking.
 The DGI proved relevant for other policy/institutional
initiatives following the global crisis, including:
 The IMF’s 2011 Triennial Surveillance Review
 The recent strengthening of the IMF’s Data Standards and
the establishment of the SDDS Plus.
Feedback from the Global Conference (3)
 G-20 data gaps work has spurred closer coordination
among domestic statistical agencies.
 There is demand for greater granularity of data.
 There is need to encourage more private sector disclosure
of data.
 Some data gaps would take longer and require additional
resources, hence the need to set priorities, action plans,
and timelines.
Challenges Going Forward (1)
 Maintaining the progress that has been achieved to date.
 Implementing the enhancements to existing datasets (e.g., BIS
IBS, CPIS, sectoral accounts).
 Completing the work on the new conceptual/statistical
frameworks, such as G-SIFIs.
 Maintaining close collaboration and coordination at the
international level, including strengthening improved data flow
among IAG members.
 Improving coordination among national and regional agencies
involved in statistical work, including with supervisory
Challenges Going Forward (2)
 Further harmonizing data templates to enhance
consistency and country comparability.
 Monitoring and meeting new data requirements emerging
from ongoing regulatory/supervisory reforms and other
G-20 initiatives, ensuring consistency between existing
datasets and emerging ones.
 Ensuring adequate resources for statistical work while
other priorities (ongoing domestic regulatory and other
priority actions) compete for constrained resources.
 Continuing and strengthening outreach and networking on
the G-20 DGI.
Concluding Remarks
 Continued support by the international community for this
statistical work is essential.
 The G-20 DGI has helped mobilize the international
statistical community to fill the data gaps emerging from
the global crisis.
 This work required unprecedented coordination among
international agencies and member countries.
 The key data outputs from the DGI are being incorporated
in the SDDS Plus.
 This work brings benefits to surveillance work and
policymaking at the national and international levels.
Annex I: G-20 Data Gaps Initiative
List of 20 Recommendations
Staffs of FSB and the IMF report back to G20 Finance Ministers and Central
Bank Governors by June 2010 on progress, with a concrete plan of action,
including a timetable, to address each of the outstanding recommendations.
Thereafter, staffs of FSB and IMF to provide updates on progress once a year.
Financial stability experts, statisticians, and supervisors should work
together to ensure that the program is successfully implemented.
Monitoring Risk in the Financial Sector
The IMF to work on increasing the number of countries disseminating
Financial Soundness Indicators (FSIs), including expanding country
coverage to encompass all G-20 members, and on other improvements to the
FSI website, including preferably quarterly reporting. FSI list to be reviewed.
In consultation with national authorities, and drawing on the Financial
Soundness Indicators Compilation Guide, the IMF to investigate, develop,
and encourage implementation of standard measures that can provide
information on tail risks, concentrations, variations in distributions, and the
volatility of indicators over time.
Further investigation of the measures of system-wide macroprudential risk to
be undertaken by the international community. As a first step, the BIS and the
IMF should complete their work on developing measures of aggregate
leverage and maturity mismatches in the financial system, drawing on inputs
from the Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS) and the Basel
Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS).
The CGFS and the BIS to undertake further work in close cooperation with
central banks and regulators on the coverage of statistics on the credit
default swap markets for the purpose of improving understanding of risk
transfers within this market.
Securities market regulators working through IOSCO to further investigate
the disclosure requirements for complex structured products, including
public disclosure requirements for financial reporting purposes, and make
recommendations for additional improvements. If necessary, taking account
of work by supervisors and other relevant bodies.
Central banks and, where relevant, statistical offices, particularly those of the
G-20 economies, to participate in the BIS data collection on securities and
contribute to the further development of the BIS-ECB-IMF Handbook on
Securities Statistics (Handbook). The Working Group on Securities
Databases to develop and implement a communications strategy for the
International Network Connections
The FSB to investigate the possibility of improved collection and sharing of
information on linkages between individual financial institutions, including
through supervisory college arrangements and the information exchange
being considered for crisis management planning. This work must take due
account of the important confidentiality and legal issues that are raised, and
existing information sharing arrangements among supervisors.
The FSB, in close consultation with the IMF, to convene relevant central
banks, national supervisors, and other international financial institutions, to
develop by end 2010 a common draft template for systemically important
global financial institutions for the purpose of better understanding the
exposures of these institutions to different financial sectors and national
markets. This work should be undertaken in concert with related work on the
systemic importance of financial institutions. Widespread consultation
would be needed, and due account taken of confidentiality rules, before any
reporting framework can be implemented.
All G-20 economies are encouraged to participate in the IMF’s Coordinated
Portfolio Investment Survey (CPIS) and in the BIS’s International Banking
Statistics (IBS). The IMF and the BIS are encouraged to continue their work
to improve the coverage of significant financial centers in the CPIS and IBS,
The BIS and the CGFS to consider, amongst other improvements, the
separate identification of nonbank financial institutions in the consolidated
banking data, as well as information required to track funding patterns in the
international financial system. The IMF, in consultation with the IMF’s
Committee on Balance of Payments Statistics, to strive to enhance the
frequency and timeliness of the CPIS data, and consider other possible
enhancements, such as the institutional sector of the foreign debtor.
The IMF to continue to work with countries to increase the number of
International Investment Position (IIP) reporting countries, as well as the
quarterly reporting of IIP data. The Balance of Payments and International
Investment Position Manual, sixth edition (BPM6) enhancements to the IIP
should be adopted by G-20 economies as soon as feasible.
The Interagency Group on Economic and Financial Statistics (IAG) to
investigate the issue of monitoring and measuring cross-border, including
foreign exchange derivative, exposures of nonfinancial, and financial,
corporations with the intention of promoting reporting guidance and the
dissemination of data.
The IAG, consulting with the FSB, to revisit the recommendation of the G-22
to examine the feasibility of developing a standardized template covering the
international exposures of large nonbank financial institutions, drawing on
the experience with the BIS’s IBS data, other existing and prospective data
sources, and consulting with relevant stakeholders.
Sectoral and Other Financial and Economic Datasets
15. The IAG, which includes all agencies represented in the Inter-Secretariat
Working Group on National Accounts, to develop a strategy to promote the
compilation and dissemination of the balance sheet approach (BSA), flow of
funds, and sectoral data more generally, starting with the G-20 economies.
Data on nonbank financial institutions should be a particular priority. The
experience of the ECB and Eurostat within Europe and the OECD should be
drawn upon. In the medium term, including more sectoral balance sheet data
in the data categories of the Special Data Dissemination Standard could be
16. As the recommended improvements to data sources and categories are
implemented, statistical experts to seek to compile distributional information
(such as ranges and quartile information) alongside aggregate figures,
wherever this is relevant. The IAG is encouraged to promote production and
dissemination of these data in a frequent and timely manner. The OECD is
encouraged to continue in its efforts to link national accounts data with
distributional information.
17. The IMF to promote timely and cross-country standardized and comparable
government finance data based on the accepted international standard, the
Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001.
The World Bank, in coordination with the IMF, and consulting with the InterAgency Task Force on Finance Statistics, to launch the public sector debt
database in 2010.
The Inter-Secretariat Working Group on Price Statistics to complete the
planned handbook on real estate price indices. The BIS and member
central banks to investigate dissemination on the BIS website of publicly
available data on real estate prices. The IAG to consider including real
estate prices (residential and commercial) in the Principal Global Indicators
(PGI) website.
Communication of Official Statistics
20. The G-20 economies to support enhancement of the Principal Global
Indicators website, and close the gaps in the availability of their national
data. The IAG should consider making longer runs of historical data
Thank you!

similar documents