Meddling relatives usually mean well but, as everyone knows, sometimes they just make things worse.
To many critics, both expert and casual, the World Bank and the IMF fall into the same camp.
PHOTO: NY TIMES
Created 57 years ago to reduce poverty and to stabilize foreign currency markets, the institutions, based a block apart in Washington, have continually struggled to meet the expectations of their big shareholders -- the world's rich nations -- as well as those of their supposed beneficiaries in the developing world.
In Haiti, for example, the World Bank has supported 41 projects over the last 50 years with more than US$1 billion in loans, and the IMF has lent the country US$150 million in the last two decades alone. Yet more than 80 percent of Haiti's population still lives in poverty, compared with 65 percent in 1987. And the conditions on the aid from the World Bank and the IMF -- including removing tariffs and growing crops intended mainly for export, such as coffee -- have allowed imports to displace food crops such as sugar cane and rice. While political upheavals in Haiti undoubtedly share the blame for its destitution, critics say mismanagement and economic policies mandated by the aid packages bear some responsibility.
When global policy-makers convene in Monterrey, Mexico, for the UN Conference on Financing for Development, President Bush is expected to repeat his calls for reform and accountability at the World Bank, which has recently been accused of squandering billions on ineffective projects. The IMF will also have much to answer for. Argentina's recent economic collapse, despite policy prescriptions and billions in aid from the IMF, threw millions of middle-class people into poverty.
The decades-long debate over the role of the bank and the fund heated up in 1997, when Kofi Annan became secretary-general of the US and called for a dialogue on development financing. Since Sept. 11, as rich nations have focused on resentment in the developing world, matters have grown more urgent.
Those rich nations have sent the World Bank and the IMF to face down some of the world's toughest economic problems. Yet the two institutions have often failed to turn deep political backing, world-class brainpower and billions in funds into good results.
Both now say they are improving their performance through internal reforms, even as they also grasp for new responsibilities. But the world's hunger for radical change -- in terms of which countries receive aid, how much is made available and how it is distributed -- could overtake their efforts.
The World Bank makes loans to countries, usually for specific projects, at interest rates that reflect their fiscal conditions. Its locally based staff helps to manage the projects, which in the past focused on building dams, paving roads or wiring electricity grids but now deal more with improving health and education. The IMF sends teams of economists, with billions in loans, to rescue countries facing financial crises. But it, too, makes loans for development.
The bank -- which has lately taken to trumpeting its success in leading fast-developing countries like China and India to higher literacy and lower infant mortality rates -- acknowledges some failures. Its reports state that living standards simply have not improved in much of sub-Saharan Africa, where since the 1960s it has invested tens of billions of dollars, some stolen by corrupt rulers and some built into huge power and transportation projects idly awaiting the use of foreign companies.
The bank's president, James Wolfensohn, is vocally urging rich countries to increase foreign aid, disbursed both directly and through the bank. But his many critics, including some who question his management style, do not trust him to use more aid effectively.
"He's not a good manager," said Nancy Birdsall, president of the Center for Global Development, a new policy group in Washington. "He's a visionary," she said, adding that she respected his passion for development but that his ability to lead the bank was limited.
Wolfensohn acknowledged that the bank had been ineffective in the past. But he contended that it had made significant strides. "Reform takes time in an institution with a 57-year history," he said by e-mail. "But I wouldn't underestimate how much change has already taken place at the bank. Some of our critics seem to be stuck somewhere in the bank of the 1980s."
The IMF, meanwhile, has been under attack for its handling of the crisis in Argentina. Despite billions in aid and advice, the country defaulted on about US$141 billion in public debt, froze private bank accounts and devalued the peso, instantly destroying the purchasing power of millions of families and resulting in mass unemployment, hunger and civil unrest. Economists say the situation shows just how little the fund understands the economic fundamentals of many countries.
In its defense, the fund's officials have said repeatedly that countries must take credit and blame for their own situations. They also said that advice offered earlier, when Argentina did not need the fund's money, went unheeded.
You've got to know the territory
Critics are unconvinced. "It's disingenuous to say that it was the country's own making," said Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics and professor at Columbia University who sparred with the IMF while serving as chief economist of the bank. "The IMF is taken seriously in the advice that it gives."
The bank and the fund gained reputations for uncompromising and often unsuccessful policies in the 1980s and early 1990s, when they encouraged countries to pursue development plans that were based on rigorous economic logic but failed to consider local circumstances.
Like an emergency room doctor who gives every patient an appendectomy regardless of the symptoms, the institutions treated almost every developing nation the same -- with a package often referred to as "structural adjustment." Usually, in return for aid, they imposed strict budgetary discipline, the ending of subsidies for food and other basics, increases in the cost of public services like health care and the elimination of trade barriers.
With so many changes coming at once, depressed economies struggled to grow as imports flooded in and traditional industries collapsed. Sometimes, poverty worsened.
"A lot of the structural-adjustment agenda was right, but was too brutally implemented," said Clare Short, Britain's secretary of state for international development. Changes were necessary in countries with high tariffs, big subsidies for manufacturers and decentralized agriculture, she said, but the bank and the fund were not mindful of economic disruptions and eroding support for their policies.
"The political price in resistance to any reform was a very serious obstacle to further progress," Short said.
In the last decade, critics of the two institutions' methods went on the offensive. "The signals came from outside the World Bank that things were not going all that well, that the structural adjustments policies were not delivering what everyone hoped," Birdsall said. The countries that put the programs into effect became more stable, she said, but economic growth and a reduction in poverty did not automatically follow. Nonetheless, the bank continues to offer a third of its aid -- US$5.8 billion in 2001 -- for structural adjustment.
Though both the bank and the fund engage in development, the fund takes the lead in ushering countries through financial crises. There, too, the policies of the last two decades have come under fire. "They went into countries facing economic downturns and said, `Make them worse,'" Stiglitz said.
The results were sometimes perverse. In Argentina, an IMF price stabilization program pegged utility prices to the dollar, he said. As the peso fell in value, the cost of electricity soared, enriching utilities while straining ordinary families.
Stiglitz said IMF policies, including lower government spending and higher interest rates on central bank lending imposed on East Asian nations in 1998, had never brought a country to prosperity.
The IMF has also been criticized as failing to encourage countries to make the most difficult economic decisions. Many economists say that in Argentina, the fund focused on nit-picking reforms of the government's budget and financing rules instead of the harder task of advising the country how to unhitch its currency from the American dollar.
"Everybody knew for months that the currency board had to go, and everybody knew that it would be a terribly messy affair," said Dr. Charles Wyplosz, co-director of the international macroeconomics program at the Center for Economic Policy Research, based in London.
Yet the fund made several other conditions for aid instead, as it had in East Asia. "The conditions often tend to be millions of little details, and not the big picture, so countries can pretend to fulfill part of the request," Wyplosz said. "They fulfill the menial ones and not the main ones, so there's a game going on that can go on for years."
Criticism of the bank and the fund peaked in 2000, when a commission organized by Congress and headed by Allan Meltzer, a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University, released a report calling for wholesale reform of both institutions, especially the World Bank. Lately, complaints about the bank have centered on Wolfensohn, a former investment banker who became its president in 1995 and said he expects to remain in office until his second term ends in 2005.
A man of many missions
In the journal Foreign Affairs last fall, Jessica Einhorn, a former managing director at the bank, accused Wolfensohn of taking on too many disparate missions. The bank's mission, she wrote, has become so complex that it "strains credulity" to portray it as a manageable organization. "The bank takes on challenges that lie far beyond any institution's operational capabilities," she wrote.
Wolfensohn acknowledges pushing the bank in new directions and says it has made progress in areas like debt relief, anti-corruption programs and community-driven development. Yet on the basic goal of eliminating poverty, the numbers show mixed results: progress in big countries such as China and India but little change in many poor, sometimes war-torn areas like sub-Saharan Africa, which is also ravaged by AIDS.
It is hard to distribute blame precisely or to know which solutions will work better. That has not stopped everyone from street protesters to world leaders from offering ideas. Lately, many of them have come from the US Treasury Department. Paul O'Neill, the secretary, has recommended that the bank turn half its lowest-interest loans into grants, so that countries trying to grow do not incur a debt burden.
Opposition to that proposal, mostly from Europe, has been fierce. "We think it's profoundly wrong," said Short, the British Cabinet member. She argued that governments would be more likely to use grants in wasteful ways, because no one would ever come looking for repayment.
Recycling program
Stiglitz said some countries should be asked to repay loans so that the money can be recycled for other countries to use. "If a country like Chile or China is getting richer," he said, "they're going to be able to repay that debt."
Some economists support the shift to grants because, they say, private markets can now finance developing countries where the money is likely to be used wisely. J. Bradford DeLong, a professor of development economics at the University of California at Berkeley, said countries that did not attract lenders in the open markets probably should not be borrowing at all.
Nicholas Stern, the chief economist of the World Bank, counters that private markets would not finance the kind of long-term projects that lay the groundwork for higher standards of living. "The markets are looking at their return," he said. "What we're looking for is the return to growth and opportunity over a long period of time."
Though he noted that the rich countries that control the bank would make the final decision, Stern indicated that the two sides could be nearing a compromise on replacing some loans with grants.
Skeptics, including Stiglitz, have suggested that O'Neill's true aim is to reduce the scope of American aid, a sensitive issue in a time of budget deficits.
But Stern said he saw evidence that the Bush administration was "seriously devoted" to development.
Among O'Neill's other recommendations was to shift the bank's focus from reducing poverty to raising labor productivity, which he says can be more accurately assessed, to bolster the bank's accountability. In The Elusive Quest for Growth, a book published last summer, William Easterly, an economist formerly at the bank, asserted that billions in aid had been squandered on poorly designed programs.
Making the rich richer
Critics say O'Neill's focus on productivity smacks of 1980s-style "trickle down" economics because productivity gains among the poor can end up lining the pockets of wealthy employers. They also say that rising productivity may not be any easier to measure than falling poverty is now. "I don't know how you measure the productivity of projects," Wyplosz said. "People will produce numbers that have no precision whatsoever, so we'll be massaging numbers instead of massaging reports."
Reflecting the historically cozy relationship between the Treasury Department and the IMF, O'Neill has left the fund to plan its own reforms. It has begun to seek ways to help bankrupt countries without resorting to expensive bailouts, which critics like Stiglitz say were meant primarily to allow wealthy investors to recover their money. As a substitute for bailouts, the fund has proposed a tribunal for restructuring the debts of insolvent countries.
Last November, Anne Krueger, the first deputy director of the IMF, suggested that the fund could sponsor a bankruptcy procedure for countries in crisis. In such a system, claims would be frozen and the fund would provide interim aid and help work out who will be repaid and how. Investors cried foul, arguing that the fund could not supply money to a country and, as a creditor itself, decide who ought to be repaid. The fund is revising its proposal.
Few people expect the meeting in Monterrey to generate new aid pledges or innovative development strategies. But the dialogue could speed the process. Neither the World Bank nor the IMF is close to completing its mission. More than a billion people still live on less than US$1 a day, and crises strike developing countries with alarming frequency. "This," Stern said, "is a long haul."
Taiwan Transport and Storage Corp (TTS, 台灣通運倉儲) yesterday unveiled its first electric tractor unit — manufactured by Volvo Trucks — in a ceremony in Taipei, and said the unit would soon be used to transport cement produced by Taiwan Cement Corp (TCC, 台灣水泥). Both TTS and TCC belong to TCC International Holdings Ltd (台泥國際集團). With the electric tractor unit, the Taipei-based cement firm would become the first in Taiwan to use electric vehicles to transport construction materials. TTS chairman Koo Kung-yi (辜公怡), Volvo Trucks vice president of sales and marketing Johan Selven, TCC president Roman Cheng (程耀輝) and Taikoo Motors Group
Among the rows of vibrators, rubber torsos and leather harnesses at a Chinese sex toys exhibition in Shanghai this weekend, the beginnings of an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven shift in the industry quietly pulsed. China manufactures about 70 percent of the world’s sex toys, most of it the “hardware” on display at the fair — whether that be technicolor tentacled dildos or hyper-realistic personalized silicone dolls. Yet smart toys have been rising in popularity for some time. Many major European and US brands already offer tech-enhanced products that can enable long-distance love, monitor well-being and even bring people one step closer to
RECORD-BREAKING: TSMC’s net profit last quarter beat market expectations by expanding 8.9% and it was the best first-quarter profit in the chipmaker’s history Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電), which counts Nvidia Corp as a key customer, yesterday said that artificial intelligence (AI) server chip revenue is set to more than double this year from last year amid rising demand. The chipmaker expects the growth momentum to continue in the next five years with an annual compound growth rate of 50 percent, TSMC chief executive officer C.C. Wei (魏哲家) told investors yesterday. By 2028, AI chips’ contribution to revenue would climb to about 20 percent from a percentage in the low teens, Wei said. “Almost all the AI innovators are working with TSMC to address the
Malaysia’s leader yesterday announced plans to build a massive semiconductor design park, aiming to boost the Southeast Asian nation’s role in the global chip industry. A prominent player in the semiconductor industry for decades, Malaysia accounts for an estimated 13 percent of global back-end manufacturing, according to German tech giant Bosch. Now it wants to go beyond production and emerge as a chip design powerhouse too, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said. “I am pleased to announce the largest IC (integrated circuit) Design Park in Southeast Asia, that will house world-class anchor tenants and collaborate with global companies such as Arm [Holdings PLC],”