IMF亟需解决“双重人格”问题

    国际货币基金组织（IMF）并非一个整体，相反，它由两部分组成。一部分是分析机构，它备受尊重，由顶尖的技术官僚掌控，工作内容是提出世界级的深刻见解；另一部分是运营机构，它的行为前后矛盾，经常屈服于发达经济体政治主宰者的压力之下，因而无法兑现承诺。

    这两部分之间的差异从没有像今天这样明显，由此产生的影响也从没有像今天这样突出。

    IMF成立于1944年，当时的全球环境和今天大相径庭。面对全球经济的起起落落，IMF一直都游刃有余。这让它成为权力最大、最有能力而且最为重要的国际性组织。理论上，IMF主要通过四个途径为全球经济服务，它们是：对各个国家的内部发展及其对境外的影响进行中立分析，后一项分析很重要；成为探讨全球政策并进行协调的论坛；作为金融方面的首选援助者，为无法进入市场、且往往濒临破产的国家提供紧急贷款；支持成员国实施良好的政策，建立良好的程序，采用良好的实践方法。

    这四项功能已经相当了不起。但它们仍未体现出IMF顺利运转时的整个覆盖范围及其影响。可以看出，在可靠状态下，IMF的所有功效都能得到显著放大。

    IMF贷款可以释放来自其他方面的资金。它的分析报告会出现在经济峰会上，而且可能影响后者的日程和内容。它的技术援助能释放各个经济体中未得到充分挖掘的潜能。同时，作为全球各项政策的指导者，IMF是最好的审查方和权衡者，包括强化国际标准在内。

    回顾以往，IMF的确时有过人表现。它的作用远远超过全球知识领域的领导机构、紧急资金的供应机构以及受到政府信任的顾问机构。它还在制度方面为整个世界指明方向。

    然而，今天的IMF还有相当大的一部分潜力没有发挥出来。正因为如此，IMF的作用和全球经济繁荣增长的要求相比也有相当大的差距。它缺乏公信力，它的号召力正在减弱，它在财力方面也落后于私营资本的增长速度和波动幅度。

    在代表性和合法性方面，IMF也有相当大的缺陷。它的管理模式非常陈旧，当然无法体现当今全球经济的特点。在这种情况下，大多数人都认为IMF的政策协调功能不够均衡，还有许多人认为IMF在这方面毫无建树。它不再具有催化作用，而这种作用对全球经济的良性发展而言是如此的重要。

    出问题的不是IMF的分析功能。在外界看来，IMF在这方面的工作具有一流水平，其中最具有代表性的就是《世界经济展望》（World Economic Outlook）报告。

    作为经济学家和市场参与者，我自己都能证明这一点。对于IMF的分析结果、数据和深层次见解，人们总是翘首以待——所有这些不仅仅是信息来源，还影响着人们对全球经济和全球市场的看法。

    The IMF is not one, but rather, two institutions: a highly respected analytical outfit anchored by superb technocrats and delivering world class insights; and an inconsistent operator that frequently falls hostage to pressure from its political masters in advanced

    Never has the contrast been as strong as it is today. And never have the consequences been as material.

    Formed in 1944 under very different global circumstances, the IMF has brilliantly navigated the ebbs and flows of the global economy. In doing so, it has retained its reputation as the most powerful, competent, and relevant of all international institutions.

    On paper, the IMF serves the global economy in four main ways: It provides unbiased analysis that covers not just national developments, but also, and importantly, their cross-border effects; it is a forum for global policy discussions and coordination; it is a financial first responder, providing emergency loans to countries shut out of markets and often on the verge of collapse; and it supports its member countries' implementation of sound policies and establishment of sound processes and practices.

    This is quite an impressive list already. Yet it does not give justice to the full scope and impact of a well-functioning IMF. You see, a credible IMF translates into an institution that is able to significantly leverage everything it does.

    IMF loans can unlock funding from other sources. Its analysis feeds into economic summits, potentially influencing the agenda and the narrative. Its technical assistance can unleash the underutilized potential of domestic economies. And, in its role as a conductor of policies around the world, it can be the best source of checks and balances, including in enforcing international standards.

    At times over its history, the IMF has indeed excelled. It showed itself to be much more than the world's intellectual leader, emergency provider of financing, and trusted advisor to governments. It also played the role of the world's institutional north star.

    Yet today's IMF falls quite short of its potential and, even more consequently, of what the global economy needs in order to grow and prosper. The institution's credibility is lacking. Its convening power has weakened. Its financial resources have lagged the growth and volatility of private capital.

    The IMF also has considerable representation and legitimacy deficits. Its governance is a reflection of the distant past and, certainly, not of today's global economy. As such, the institution's policy coordination role is seen as asymmetric by most, and ineffectual by many. And the Fund no longer plays the catalytic role that is so important for good global economic outcomes.

    The fault does not lie in the institution's analysis. Its work, spearheaded by the "World Economic Outlook," is regarded as first class.

    I can attest to this as both an economist and market participant. We eagerly await the Fund's analysis, data, and insights -- all of which inform and influence how we think about the global economy and global markets.