Asian Financial Crisis and IMF Conditionality

1997年亚洲金融危机后，IMF的附加条件使印尼、韩国等受援国的经济雪上加霜。1980年代初，国际货币基金组织为成员国作出的安排导致了1990年代中期的金融动荡，原因是通过非银行金融机构对公司的证券投资增加，特别是在泰国和韩国。这些金融机构在自由化后迅速发展，但在企业融资方面的经验和专业知识有限，金融部门的重组仍在进行中，金融市场仍处于不成熟的发展阶段，公司治理和市场纪律薄弱，缺乏独立外部审计的透明会计做法，以及公司财务状况的披露不足。此外，货币当局、金融机构和大型企业集团之间保持着复杂的非正式关系和联系，特别是在印度尼西亚和韩国。对包括国有化商业银行在内的金融机构的传统监管和保护未能使其建立起信贷甄别和项目评估的专门知识，也未能发展具有独立内部控制的风险管理技术。特别是，2002年前后，印度尼西亚和韩国过于紧急地将陷入困境的银行销售给国际金融机构，导致这两个国家的金融市场持续不稳定。因此，必须补充传统的条件性手段，集中注意改革的微观经济和体制方面，特别是改组受援国的金融部门。

After 1997 Asian financial crisis, the IMF conditionality had aggravated, in spite of its original intention, the economy of recipient countries such as Indonesia and Korea. The IMF arrangements in the early 1980s for the member countries resulted in financial turmoil in mid-1990s due to increasing portfolio investment in corporations through non bank financial institutions, especially in Thailand and Korea. These financial institutions developed quickly with limited experience and expertise on corporate financing after the liberalization.Restructuring financial sector is still in the process and financial markets are still premature stage of development with weak corporate governance and market discipline, the lack of transparent accounting practice by independent external auditing, and inadequate disclosure of corporate financial position. In addition, complex informal relationship and connection retained among monetary authorities, financial institutions and big conglomerates, specifically in Indonesia and Korea. Traditional regulations and protection for financial institutions including nationalized commercial banks had failed to build tip their expertise for credit-screening and project evaluation, and to develop risk management techniques with discrete internal control. Especially, too urgent sale of ailing banks to international financial institutions in Indonesia and Korea, around 2002 resulted in persistent instability in the financial markets in the countries.The IMF conditionality practices have been based on a market-supporting institutional framework. Therefore, it has been necessary to supplement the traditional instruments of conditionality by focusing on the microeconomic and institutional aspects of reform, especially restructuring the financial sector in the recipient country.