This note provides operational guidance for the use of the Sovereign Risk and Debt Sustainability Framework (SRDSF), which replaces the Debt Sustainability Framework for Market Access Countries. The SRDSF introduces improvements in organization, methodology, transparency, and communication when analyzing public debt issues in countries that mainly finance themselves with market-based debt. After its phased adoption beginning [June 2022], it will become the Fund’s principal tool for assessing public debt sustainability.

The framework for fiscal policy and public debt sustainability analysis (DSA) in market-access countries (MACs) was reviewed by the Executive Board in August 2011.1 The review responded to shortcomings in identifying fiscal vulnerabilities and assessing risks to debt sustainability against the backdrop of increased concerns over fiscal policy and public debt sustainability in many advanced economies.

A careful review has revealed significant scope to modernize and better align the MAC DSA with its objectives and the IMF’s lending framework. This note proposes replacing the current framework with a new methodology based on risk assessments at three different horizons. Extensive testing has shown that the proposed framework has much better predictive accuracy than the current one. In addition to predicting sovereign stress, the framework can be used to derive statements about debt stabilization under current policies and about debt sustainability.

Low-income countries (LICs) face significant challenges in meeting their development objectives while at the same time ensuring that their external debt remains sustainable. In April 2005, the Executive Boards of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Development Association (IDA) endorsed the Debt Sustainability Framework (DSF), a tool developed jointly by IMF and World Bank staff to conduct public and external debt sustainability analysis in low-income countries. The DSF aims to help guide the borrowing decisions of LICs, provide guidance for creditors’ lending and grant allocation decisions, and improve World Bank and IMF assessments and policy advice.

The objective of the joint Bank-Fund debt sustainability framework for low-income countries is to support LICs in their efforts to achieve their development goals without creating future debt problems. Countries that have received debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) need to be kept on a sustainable track. Under the framework, country DSAs are prepared jointly by Bank and Fund staff, with close collaboration between the two staffs on the design of the macroeconomic baseline, alternative scenarios, the debt distress rating, and the drafting of the write-up

The new Debt Sustainability Framework for Market Access Countries (MAC SRDSF) contemplates certain output that would be shared with the Board but that would need to be deleted from Country Documents before publication. A targeted modification to the Transparency Policy—proposed in this paper—is required for such deletions to be applied across market access Country Documents rather than on a case-by-case basis. The MAC SRDSF output to be deleted before publication consists on: (i) the near-term risk assessment; (ii) when debt is assessed to be sustainable, the qualification ”with high probability” or “but not with high probability”, unless such qualification is required for use of Fund resources; and (iii) the mechanical signal on debt sustainability.

The objective of the joint Fund-Bank debt sustainability framework for low-income countries is to support LICs in their efforts to achieve their development goals without creating future debt problems. Countries that have received debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) need to be kept on a sustainable track. Under the framework, country DSAs are prepared jointly by Bank and Fund staff, with close collaboration between the two staffs on the design of the macroeconomic baseline, alternative scenarios, the debt distress rating, and the drafting of the write-up.