Tohid Atashbar, Yidan Cheng, Leonardo Indraccolo, Jackson Mandel, Tiffany Munoz-Zegarra, Atsushi Oshima, Noor Rahman, Sergio L. Rodriguez, Sahra Sakha, Christoph Ungerer, and Aleksandra Zdzienicka<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This paper examines the determinants of policy responses to the 2026 energy shock using the newly constructed IMF Global Policy Tracker. The main analysis focuses on measures announced between end-February and early June, while preliminary data through mid-September shed light on how policy responses evolved as energy prices began to normalize. The findings point to distinct drivers of policy composition and design. At average public debt levels, greater shock exposure is associated with a larger share of price pass-through measures. As debt rises, this association strengthens, while the relationship between exposure and fiscal shielding weakens. Monetary responses are driven mainly by pre-shock inflation developments, while financial-stabilization measures are more closely associated with reserve adequacy. Policy design\u2014including targeting and temporariness\u2014is shaped more by institutional capacity, inflation, and the political cycle than by shock exposure. The extended dataset shows a gradual shift away from fiscal shielding toward pass-through, demand- and inflation- management measures. Later announcements are more likely to identify beneficiaries but less likely to include explicit expiry dates or sunset provisions. The main findings broadly hold, although some become less statistically significant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u03a0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae: IMF<\/p>\n\n\n\n