Post-Washington Consensus (post-washington + consensus)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


The Regulatory State and Turkish Banking Reforms in the Age of Post-Washington Consensus

DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE, Issue 1 2010
Caner Bakir
ABSTRACT The new era of the Post-Washington Consensus (PWC), promoted under the auspices of International Financial Institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, centres on the need to develop sound financial regulation and strong regulatory institutions, especially in the realm of banking and finance in post-financial crisis developing countries. This article uses an examination of the Turkish banking sector experience with the PWC in the aftermath of the 2001 financial crisis to show its considerable strengths and weaknesses. The authors argue that the emergent regulatory state in the bank-based financial system has a narrow focus on strengthening prudential regulation, whilst ignoring the increased ,financialization' of the Turkish economy. They identify the positive features of the new era of the PWC in terms of prudential regulation, which has become much more robust in its ability to withstand external shocks. At the same time, however, the article highlights some of the limitations of the new era which resemble the limitations of the PWC. These include the distributional impact of the regulatory reforms within the banking sector, and notably the emergence of foreign banks as the major beneficiaries of this process; weaknesses in promoting productive bank intermediation that finance the real economy and economic growth, leading to poverty reduction via growth of employment whilst stimulating financialization within the economy; and finally, the exclusive focus on prudential regulation, whilst ignoring regulatory costs, consumer protection and competition regulation. [source]


Rethinking the Emerging Post-Washington Consensus

DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE, Issue 2 2005
Ziya Öni
The objective of this article is to provide a critical assessment of the emerging Post-Washington Consensus (PWC), as the new influential vision in the development debate. The authors begin by tracing the main record of the Washington Consensus, the set of neoliberal economic policies propagated largely by key Bretton Woods institutions like the World Bank and the IMF, that penetrated into the economic policy agendas of many developing countries from the late 1970s onwards. They then outline the main tenets of the PWC, emerging from the shortcomings of that record and the reaction it created in the political realm. The authors accept that the PWC, in so far as it influences the actual practice of key Bretton Woods institutions, provides an improvement over the Washington Consensus. Yet, at the same time, they draw attention to the failure of the PWC, as reflected in current policy practice, to provide a sufficiently broad framework for dealing with key and pressing development issues such as income distribution, poverty and self-sustained growth. [source]


,Social Development' as Neoliberal Trojan Horse: The World Bank and the Kecamatan Development Program in Indonesia

DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE, Issue 3 2009
Toby Carroll
ABSTRACT This article seeks to reconceptualize the post-Washington consensus (PWC) by focusing not simply upon the institutional structures and ideology promoted by it, but the manner in which these are promoted on the ground. The aim is to reveal a central distinction between the Washington consensus and the PWC that has been somewhat neglected: their diverging approaches to implementation. The author focuses on the World Bank-funded Kecamatan Development Program (KDP) in Indonesia, a project that is viewed by some as being somewhat unorthodox. He argues that in addition to its promotion of the latest round of institutional reforms, what is really different about KDP, compared with older approaches to market-led development typical of the Washington consensus, is the manner in which it delivers its mix of neoliberalism. What is radical about a programme like KDP is that it constitutes a new Trojan horse for embedding market-centred norms and practices.1 In general, this is demonstrative of a key difference between the Washington consensus and the PWC that has been undervalued in many analyses of the dominant development paradigm: the methods used to embed and sustain liberal markets. [source]


Attacking Poverty and the ,post-Washington consensus'

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, Issue 3 2001
Paul Mosley
Has the increasingly pro-poor stance of the World Bank, as manifested in particular in its most recent World Development Report (WDR), caused it to abandon its traditionally free-market attitudes ? The answer is ,yes and no'. The pursuit of ,security' espoused by the WDR has forced the Bank to acknowledge widespread market failure in the provision of security, both social and financial; and this has caused the Bank to espouse some measures very inconsistent with the Washington consensus, such as international capital controls. On the other hand, the old agenda of rolling back the frontiers of the state remains, and is given a new twist in WDR 2000 by the revelation that the ,voices of the poor' are arrayed against bureaucratic abuses. Debate within the Bank has become much more open and transparent, and this has exposed long-persisting internal differences about what markets still need to be liberalized in what environments. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]