Abstract:
We argue in this paper that cancelling the debt of the poorest countries was a good thing, but that it should not imply that the debt instrument should be foregone. We claim that debt and debt cancellations are indeed two complementary instruments which, if properly managed, perform better than either loans or grants taken in isolation. The core of the intuition, which we develop in a simple two-period model, relates to the fact that the poorest countries are also the most volatile, so that contingent facilities, explicitly incorporating debt cancellation mechanisms, are a valuable instrument. Based on this idea, we present one of the lending scheme that could be applied to the poorest countries and calibrate the cost that would have to be borne by the creditors, were they to incorporate contingencies clause in their lending strategy.
Downloads: (external link) http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP6024.asp (application/pdf)
CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
Related works: Working Paper: Loans or Grants? (2007) Journal Article: Loans or Grants? (2007) This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
More papers in CEPR Discussion Papers from C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers Address: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 53--56 Great Sutton Street, London EC1V 0DG Series data maintained by ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .