|

THE IMF, THE WORLD BANK, AND
STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT
What are the IMF and World Bank?
The IMF and World Bank are controlled by the wealthy governments
of the world, led by the U.S., the U.K., Japan, Germany, France,
Canada, and Italy -- the "Group of 7," which holds over
40% of the votes on their boards. Their function is to impose
economic austerity policies in the countries of the so-called
"Third World" or "global South" and the "transition
economies" of the former Soviet bloc. Once countries build
up large external debts, as most of those in Africa, Asia, Latin
America, and the Caribbean have, they cannot get credit or cash
anywhere else and are forced to go to these international institutions
and accept whatever conditions are demanded of them. None of the
countries has emerged from their debt problems; indeed most countries
now have much higher levels of debt than when they first accepted
IMF/World Bank "assistance."
Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs)
IMF/World Bank conditions, known as "structural adjustment
programs" (though the institutions are trying to escape that
termâs negative reputation by changing the name to "poverty
reduction and growth programs"!) force countries to promote
sweatshops, exports to rich countries, and high-return cash investment.
The increase in international commerce ö corporate globalization
that followed the widespread imposition of SAPs in the 1980s led
to demands by corporations and investors for ways to lock in their
privileges and protection against the perceived danger of governments
seizing assets or imposing new regulations. The WTO, established
in 1995, was the answer to those demands, an institution whose
secret tribunals can overrule national laws if they are found
to violate the rights of corporations.
The World Bank is best known for financing big projects like
dams, roads, and power plants, supposedly designed to assist in
economic development, but which have often been associated with
monumental environmental devastation and social dislocation. In
recent years, about half of its lending has gone to programs indistinguishable
from the IMFâs: austerity plans that "reform" economic
policies by suffocating the poor and inviting corporate exploitation.
Although the IMF finally got some of the criticism due it with
the East Asian financial crisis (where it imposed austerity programs
on South Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand), the two institutions
continue to be the chosen tools of the political and business
elites for ruling the global economy, and run, to one degree or
another, about 90 countriesâ economies. These countries are forced
to adopt policies even more committed to deregulation and withdrawal
of government from insuring public welfare than those in the U.S.
Considering how impoverished many of these countries were to start
with, the effects of these policies have been predictably devastating.
The "emerging market success stories" we sometimes read
about generate wealth which goes to very small segments of the
populations, and much of it ends up in the North. The great majority
of the people of the South are enduring increased poverty, decreased
access to basic services, and decreased control over their own
economies.
SAPS Work for Corporations and Elites; Impoverish the Rest
How -- and why -- do the structural adjustment programs that
the IMF & World Bank impose create conditions that multinational
corporations desire and that devastate most people in the Southern
countries? A look at the most common SAP conditions show how economic
"advice" is used to maintain the interests of the wealthy
at the expense of continued suffering for the bulk of the people.
|
IMF / WORLD BANK CONDITION
|
IMPACT ON ELITE (Corporations, Investors,
Wealthy)
|
IMPACT ON POOR
|
|
Cut Social Spending: Reduce expenditures on health, education,
etc.
[IMF claims it is now making sure such spending goes up,
but often it's to put in place systems to collect fees.]
|
ð More debts repaid, including to World Bank and IMF.
|
ð Increased school fees force parents to pull children
-- usually girls -- from school. Literacy rates go down.
ð Poorly-educated generation not equipped for skilled jobs
ð Higher fees for medical service mean less treatment,
more suffering, needless deaths.
ð Women, already overburdened, must provide healthcare
and caretaking for family members.
|
|
Shrink Government: Reduce budget expense by trimming payroll
and programs.
|
ð Fewer government employees means less capacity to monitor
businesses' adherence to labor, environmental, and financial
regulations
ð Frees up cash for debt service
|
ð Massive layoffs in countries where government is often
the largest employer
ð Makes people desperate to work at any wage
|
|
Increase Interest Rates: To combat inflation, increase
interest charged for credit and awarded to savings
|
á Investors find country a profitable place to park cash,
though they may pull it out at any moment
|
á Small farmers and businesses canât get capital to stay
afloat.
á Small farmers sell land, work as tenants or move to worse
lands.
á Businesses shut down, leaving workers unemployed
|
|
Eliminate Regulations on Foreign Ownership of Resources
and Businesses
|
ð Multinational corporations can purchase or start enterprises
easily
ð Countries compete for foreign investment by offering
tax breaks, low wages, free trade zones
ð Once in the country, corporations can turn to WTO for
enforcement of "rights"
|
ð Control of entire sectors of economy can shift to foreign
hands
ð Governments offer implicit pledges not to enforce labor
and environmental laws.
|
|
IMF / WORLD BANK CONDITION
|
IMPACT ON ELITE (Corporations, Investors,
Wealthy)
|
IMPACT ON POOR
|
|
Eliminate Tariffs: Stop collecting taxes on imports; these
taxes are often applied to goods which would compete with
domestically-produced goods
|
ð Allows foreign goods easy access to domestic markets
ð Makes luxury items cheaper for those in the country
ð Allows country to comply with WTO agreements
|
ð Makes it harder for domestic producers to compete against
better-equipped and richer foreign suppliers
ð Leads to closure of businesses and layoffs
|
|
Cut Subsidies for Basic Goods: Reduce government expenditures
supporting reduced cost of bread, petroleum, fertilizer,
etc.
|
ð Frees up more money for debt payments
ð Allows for greater profits on formerly-subsidized goods
|
ð Raises cost of items needed to survive
ð Most frequent flashpoint for civil unrest
|
|
Re-orient Economies from Subsistence to Exports: Give
incentives for farmers to produce cash crops (coffee, cotton,
etc.) for foreign markets rather than food for domestic
ones; encourage manufacturing to focus on simple assembly
(often clothing) for export rather than manufacturing for
own country; encourage extraction of valuable mineral resources
|
ð Produces hard currency to pay off more debts
ð Law of supply and demand pushes down price of commodities
as more countries produce more, meaning guaranteed supply
of low-cost products to export markets
ð Local competition eliminated for multinational corporations
ð Increased availability of low-cost labor
|
ð Law of supply and demand pushes down price of commodities
as more countries produce more, meaning local producers
often lose money
ð Best lands devoted to cash crops; poorer land used for
food crops, leading to soil erosion
ð Food security threatened
ð Women often relegated to gathering all food for family
while men work for cash
ð Makes country more dependent on imported food and manufactured
goods
ð Forests and mineral resources (oil, copper, etc) overexploited,
leading to environ-mental destruction and displacement
|
So Why Do Countries Agree to SAPs?
SAPs are anti-democratic in more than one way. The institutions
are correct in saying that the plans are formulated in part, and
agreed to, by the governments. But the government officials involved
are usually limited to the Finance Ministry and the Central Bank,
usually among the most conservative, Northern-educated, and wealthy
members of the government -- in other words, those most likely
to agree with IMF economics and benefit from the policies. In
many cases even they feel coerced into going along with IMF/World
Bank demands. If they donât cooperate, the consequence can be
a complete cut-off of credit because other lenders follow the
lead of these institutions.
With such unpopular policies, it is the rare government that
can "sell" structural adjustment to its people, especially
after 20 years of similar failed policies. The slogan "short-term
pain for long-term gain" sounds hollow when people have heard
it for a whole generation. SAPs encourage instability in democratic
countries by forcing elected governments to institute measures
which make them illegitimate among their people. It has been argued
that the IMF prefers dictatorships to democratic governments,
because dictators can more successfully impose SAPs. And once
the rules are in place, the WTO extends the attack on democracy
by overruling any regulations that corporations claim interfere
with their right to profits.
The fact that institutions based in Washington and largely controlled
by the U.S. Treasury Department have been starving peoples around
the world for two decades is a scandal. That people in the U.S.
are barely aware of the fact is a disgrace. The April mobilization
maneuvered the mainstream press into paying attention to the institutionsâ
existence; in September we will make the connections to local
economic and labor struggles in the United States, and demonstrate
that the same struggle is going on North and South, East and West.
50 Years Is Enough: U.S. Network for Global Economic Justice
1247 E Street, S.E. ð Washington, DC 20003 USA
202/IMF-BANK ð e-mail: <wb50years@igc.org>
web: <www.50years.org>
|