The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
What is the World Bank?
Created at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, The World Bank Group
is comprised of five agencies that make loans or guarantee credit to its
177 member countries. In addition to financing projects such as roads,
power plants and schools, the Bank also makes loans to restructure a country's
economic system by funding structural adjustment programs (SAPs). The
Bank manages a loan portfolio totaling US$200 billion and last year loaned
a record US$28.9 billion to over 80 countries.
What is the IMF?
Also created at the Bretton Woods Conference, the mission of the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) is to supply member states with money to help them
overcome short-term balance-of-payments difficulties. Such money is only
made available, however, after the recipients have agreed to policy reforms
in their economies-- in short, to implement a structural adjustment program.
Is structural adjustment working?
No. Structural adjustment has exacerbated poverty in most countries where
it has been applied, contributing to the suffering of millions and causing
widespread environmental degradation. And since the 1980s, adjustment
has helped create a net outflow of wealth from the developing world, which
has paid out five times as much capital to the industrialized countries
of the North as it has received.
I know there are a lot of qualified people at the World Bank and IMF
who are experts in economics and other fields. If structural adjustment
doesn't work, then why are they promoting it?
The wealthy Northern countries which control the World Bank and IMF dictate
the agendas of these institutions, and their interests are best served
by defending the status quo. Furthermore, the Bank's staff is currently
dominated by economists who have spent their careers defending the validity
of neoclassical economics, the foundation of the World Bank model of development.
This orthodox view holds sacred the efficiency of free markets and private
producers and the benefits of international trade and competition. Given
the lack of accountability to outside parties, there is little incentive
for the Bank and IMF to alter the design of structural adjustment, even
when faced with mounting evidence attesting to the failure of these programs.
I hear a lot about the debt crisis in the Third World and know that
many of the loans are owed to commercial banks and Northern governments.
People say that some or all of this debt should be canceled to
give developing countries a chance to recover economically. Shouldn't
they pay?
Much of this debt dates back to 1970s, when it was lent irresponsibly
by commercial banks and borrowed recklessly by foreign governments, most
of which were not popularly elected and which no longer hold power. The
advent of the debt crisis, which occurred in the early 1980s due to a
worldwide collapse in the prices of commodities that developing countries
export (e.g., coffee, cocoa) and to rising oil prices and interest rates,
forced these countries into a position where they were unable to make
payments. Yet there's no such thing as bankruptcy protection for a country,
regardless of the circumstances. When the U.S. department store Macy's
filed for bankruptcy under chapter 11 in January 1992, it received instant
protection from creditors and working capital to keep open. At the same
time, when Russia told the West that it could not meet government had
to wait for more than a year before the IMF provided financial help.
What is the relationship between debt and structural adjustment?
Since the 1980s the debt situation has steadily worsened, so that now
the total debt of the developing world equals about one-half their combined
GNP and nearly twice their total annual export earnings. Because of this
crushing debt-service burden, foreign governments have virtually no bargaining
power when negotiating a structural adjustment program and must accept
any conditions imposed by the World Bank and the IMF. And SAPs themselves,
by orienting economies toward generating foreign exchange, are designed
to ensure that debtor countries continue to make debt payments, further
enriching Northern creditors at the expense of domestic programs in the
South.
How's the World Bank's record on responsible lending?
In 1992, an internal World bank review found that more than a third of
all Bank loans did not meet the institution's own lending criteria and
warned that the Bank had been overtaken by a dangerous "culture of
approval." Bank officials, in other words, felt heavy pressure to
push through new loans even when presented with overwhelming evidence
that the project in question was ill advised.
Who makes decisions at the World Bank and IMF?
Decisions at the World Bank and IMF are made by a vote of the Board of
Executive Directors, which represents member countries. Unlike the United
Nations, where each member nation has an equal vote, voting power at the
World Bank and IMF is determined by the level of a nation's financial
contribution. Therefore, the United States has roughly 17% of the vote,
with the seven largest industrialized countries (G-7) holding a total
of 45%. Because of the scale of its contribution, the United States has
always had a dominant voice and has at all times exercised an effective
veto. At the same time, developing countries have relatively little power
within the institution, which, through the programs and policies they
decide to finance, have tremendous impact throughout local economies and
societies. Furthermore, the President of the World Bank is by tradition
an American, and the IMF President is a European.
How is it that U.S. business and other companies benefit from the lending
programs at the World Bank?
Development projects undertaken with World Bank financing typically include
money to pay for materials and consulting services provided by Northern
countries. U.S. Treasury Department officials calculate that for every
U.S.$1 the United States contributes to international development banks,
U.S. exporters win more than U.S.$2 in bank-financed procurement contracts.
Why is this bad?
Given this self-interest, the Bank tends to finance bigger, more expensive
projects--which almost always require the materials and technical expertise
of Northern contractors--and ignores smaller-scale, locally appropriate
alternatives. The mission of the World Bank to alleviate poverty, not
provide business for U.S. contractors.
For more information on the World Bank, the IMF and the 50 Years
Is Enough Network contact:
50 Years Is Enough: U.S. Network for Global Economic Justice
1247 E Street, SE
Washington, D.C. 20005
Tel: (202) IMF-BANK
Fax: (202) 544-9359
Email: wb50years@igc.org
Web Site:
www.50years.org
|