Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 42 items for :

  • "critics of the IMF" x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund. External Relations Dept.

H orst Köhler took office on May 1,2000, as the eighth Managing Director of the IMF. The IMF Executive Board had unanimously selected him as Managing Director and Chairman of the Board on March 23 (see IMF Survey , April 3, page 97). Köhler told the press on assuming his new position that he is “excited to be in Washington and to get to work here and look at what the priorities are.” Asked to comment on the issues that had been raised by critics of the IMF at the time of the spring meetings, he said, “We have to take these kinds of discussions seriously

International Monetary Fund. External Relations Dept.

FOR MANY years, friends and critics of the IMF urged it to solicit independent assessments of its policies and operations. In the late 1990s, the IMF appointed three groups of outside experts to appraise its programs for low-income countries, its regular surveillance of its members’ policies, and its economic research. Those assessments were published, along with staff responses and summaries of the discussions by the Executive Board when it reviewed the assessments. But the Board soon adopted a different approach—one strongly favored by outsiders. It

Mr. Peter S. Heller

commercial loan element. Yet, since concessional loans are still borrowing, accounting conventions require all of the loan to be placed “below the line”; thus, the full amount of expenditure financed by such a loan unambiguously increases the deficit (see column 3 of the table). Critics of the IMF’s approach argue that the grant element of the loan should be treated like any other grant; thus, for a $10 million loan with a grant element of 40 percent, the grant-inclusive deficit would rise from the original program level by only $6 million (table, column 4), rather than

International Monetary Fund. External Relations Dept.

the TA effort . IMF S urvey: The whirlwind round of about a dozen presidential elections in Latin America is nearly over, just Argentina later this year. How do you see the political economy landscape shaping up? Any thoughts on negotiating programs with Peru and Nicaragua, now headed by 1980s presidents who had been extremely vocal critics of the IMF? P ortugal: Democracy is thriving in Latin America—in fact, it’s one of the most positive changes in the region of the past two or three decades—and presidential elections are a vital part of the

Mr. Dean A. DeRosa and Mr. Joshua E. Greene

D uring the past decade, critics of the IMF-and World Bank-supported adjustment programs in Africa have argued that the frequent recommendation for currency devaluations is likely to prove counterproductive. According to these critics, any gains in competitiveness for individual countries would be offset by a fall in the terms of trade resulting from devaluations and increases in export volume from other countries exporting the same products. The net result would be no gain—and perhaps even a decline—in total export earnings for the countries that devalue

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

most value and agreed that it could be integrated to a greater extent into policy work—an assessment that has also been shared by external critics of the IMF. The evaluation would be a follow up exercise and look at two areas. First, the evaluation would examine the way in which research topics are selected and priorities imposed across the IMF, and the extent to which the recommendation has been carried out to direct research more to areas where it could add the most value and be better integrated into policy work. This will focus both on the use of research

Mr. Prakash Loungani

suggests that IMF lending improves the access of emerging market countries to private funds and the terms on which they obtain this access. But is this a good thing? Not according to critics of the IMF’s “rescue packages,” who see investor willingness to make more loans on better terms as an indication of the “moral hazard” fostered by IMF lending. Critics argue that investors make these loans because they believe the IMF will “bail out” countries (and, indirectly, investors) in the event of a crisis. Proponents of IMF lending, in contrast, take a very different view

International Monetary Fund. Research Dept.

fiscal adjustment relies on cuts in current spending but do not change when adjustment is based on cuts in public investment or revenue increases. This suggests that financial markets may also view cuts in current spending as a stronger sign of sustainable fiscal consolidation than cuts in public investment. Some critics of the IMF have argued that the fiscal adjustment often called for under IMF-supported programs has put strong downward pressures on public investment and social spending in many countries. However, the IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office (2003

Sara Kane

private capital markets. Countries with low access to private markets had far fewer options than those with high access and were, thus, more likely to keep coming back to the IMF, regardless of how effective their programs had been. Another view .Some critics of the IMF’s advice to Asian countries hit by the financial crises of 1997 and 1998 have asserted that the IMF’s standard prescription—fiscal and monetary tightening—was inappropriate and dangerous, because the crises were structural, rather than macroeconomic in origin, according to James Boughton of the IMF. It