Search

In recent years, there has been renewed interest in providing countercyclical lending and sustainable development financing through national development financial institutions (NDFIs). While NDFIs are often a feasible solution for addressing development needs and closing financing gaps, they are not always the best solution, and their setup and structure need to be tailored to the country’s needs. It is important that prior to setting up a new NDFI or increasing the scope of operations of the existing ones, governments consider all available public policy interventions as well as options for private capital involvement to address unmet financing needs of the private sector. NDFIs will likely see strong demand for their interventions in a post- Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recovery phase. This calls for enhanced NDFI efficiency and effectiveness. To maximize the net benefits of NDFIs and ensure their financial sustainability, NDFIs should be effectively managed and properly supervised. NDFIs have been important actors in the implementation of countercyclical finance in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and have helped mitigate a credit crunch. During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments have taken on large balance-sheet risks to support credit growth, in many cases using NDFIs as administrators of public anti-crisis programs.

This paper introduces a new global database and a policy classification framework that records the financial sector policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic across 154 jurisdictions. It documents that authorities around the world have taken a diverse array of measures to mitigate financial distress in markets and for borrowers, and to support the provision of critical financial services to the real economy. Measures that focus on the banking sector constitute the majority of policies taken and aim to take advantage of the flexibility embedded in the international standards. However, emerging markets and developing economies tend to rely more on prudential measures that go beyond this embedded flexibility compared with advanced economies, which may reduce bank balance sheet transparency and increase risks. Using Cox proportional hazards and Poisson regressions, the paper takes initial steps to analyze the determinants of policy makers’ responsiveness and activity in emerging markets and developing economies, respectively. The results indicate that policy makers have typically been significantly more responsive and have taken more policy measures in emerging markets and developing economies that are richer and more populous. Countries with higher private debt levels tend to respond earlier with banking sector and liquidity and funding measures. The spread of COVID-19, macro-financial fundamentals, and fiscal and containment policies appear to play a limited role. In a substantially smaller sample, the paper explores the role of banking characteristics and finds that emerging markets and developing economies with higher private credit levels and that have adopted Basel III features have taken fewer policy measures. Future work is necessary for better understanding the country determinants of the policy response as well as the effectiveness and potential unintended consequences of the measures.