[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Together, they seem to suggest that these norms reflect aworld consensus on institutional procedures and arrangements which willbest ensure continuing economic devel opment.These norms then becomethe rules of the game which are put forward as having universalvalidity.13Indeed, the bank has often been criticized for its role in maintaining thearchitecture of imperialism.Notwithstanding its important functions as ajuridical and economic regulator, the World Bank is rarely mentionedspecifically in Empire.And although Hardt and Negri have subsequently statedthat international economic organizations such as the World Bank are key toEmpire,14 we think that this omission is a telling one.This is particularly sobecause while on some levels the bank does seem to have taken an empirial turn, upon closer examination, we would argue that the bank s regulatorypractices both are more reliant on a modern notion of sovereignty than apostmodern one (as Hardt and Negri characterize it) and demonstrate that eventhe bank understands that the ongoing production of the global market is reliantupon the institutional and legal frameworks produced by nation-states. 78 EMPIRE S NEW CLOTHESSome recent developments at the World Bank, however, do appearhomologous to Hardt s and Negri s account of the coming of Empire.In recentyears, the bank s publications suggest that it has significantly altered itsconceptual frameworks, seemingly responding to those who would criticize it formaintaining and perpetuating the hierarchies of past imperialisms.It wouldappear that, correspondingly, its practices and policy prescriptions for developingcountries have changed.15 This shift seems to be roughly synchronous with theadvent of Empire and on some levels does exhibit certain tendencies resonantwith Hardt s and Negri s conception of the shift from modern to postmodernimperialisms.16 This ostensible change of position is particularly well reflected inits two most recent World Development Reports.17The recent shift in the World Bank s approach to development policy hassometimes been described in a shorthand form as the replacement of the Washington consensus with a post-Washington consensus. 18 We wouldhesitate to describe what has emerged from critiques of the Washingtonconsensus as a new consensus; however, we would certainly agree that therehave been important changes in bank perceptions and prescriptions.While somequestioning of various tenets of the Washington consensus was visible in theearly 1990s, the Asian currency crisis in 1997 prompted a more widespread andpublic rethinking.One consequence of that process was seen in the preparationof the World Development Report 2001: Attacking Poverty (WDR 2001).RaviKanbur, the lead author of the report, was selected by then-chief economistJoseph Stiglitz for his willingness to rethink previous orthodoxies.Kanburengaged in an unprecedented amount of consultation outside the bank s usualpolicy circles and widely circulated a controversial draft report.Indeed, thecontroversy led to his resignation and a limited retreat from the positions taken inthe draft.This controversy notwithstanding, the shift we are tracing is notconfined to the 2001 World Development Report and the bank s subsequentrecoil from the report s softer approach.19 It is arguable that elements of thisshift are still clearly visible in the World Development Report 2002: BuildingInstitutions for Markets (WDR 2002).The Washington consensus is a term that became a kind of shorthand for apackage of policies including tight fiscal and monetary policies, freer trade andcapital flows, privatization, deregulation, and openness to foreign directinvestment.These policies were urged on developing countries by the WorldBank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and often imposed throughconditionality clauses in lending arrangements.Many if not all of these policieswere directed towards integrating developing countries into global markets forfinance, investment, and goods and services [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl matkasanepid.xlx.pl
.Together, they seem to suggest that these norms reflect aworld consensus on institutional procedures and arrangements which willbest ensure continuing economic devel opment.These norms then becomethe rules of the game which are put forward as having universalvalidity.13Indeed, the bank has often been criticized for its role in maintaining thearchitecture of imperialism.Notwithstanding its important functions as ajuridical and economic regulator, the World Bank is rarely mentionedspecifically in Empire.And although Hardt and Negri have subsequently statedthat international economic organizations such as the World Bank are key toEmpire,14 we think that this omission is a telling one.This is particularly sobecause while on some levels the bank does seem to have taken an empirial turn, upon closer examination, we would argue that the bank s regulatorypractices both are more reliant on a modern notion of sovereignty than apostmodern one (as Hardt and Negri characterize it) and demonstrate that eventhe bank understands that the ongoing production of the global market is reliantupon the institutional and legal frameworks produced by nation-states. 78 EMPIRE S NEW CLOTHESSome recent developments at the World Bank, however, do appearhomologous to Hardt s and Negri s account of the coming of Empire.In recentyears, the bank s publications suggest that it has significantly altered itsconceptual frameworks, seemingly responding to those who would criticize it formaintaining and perpetuating the hierarchies of past imperialisms.It wouldappear that, correspondingly, its practices and policy prescriptions for developingcountries have changed.15 This shift seems to be roughly synchronous with theadvent of Empire and on some levels does exhibit certain tendencies resonantwith Hardt s and Negri s conception of the shift from modern to postmodernimperialisms.16 This ostensible change of position is particularly well reflected inits two most recent World Development Reports.17The recent shift in the World Bank s approach to development policy hassometimes been described in a shorthand form as the replacement of the Washington consensus with a post-Washington consensus. 18 We wouldhesitate to describe what has emerged from critiques of the Washingtonconsensus as a new consensus; however, we would certainly agree that therehave been important changes in bank perceptions and prescriptions.While somequestioning of various tenets of the Washington consensus was visible in theearly 1990s, the Asian currency crisis in 1997 prompted a more widespread andpublic rethinking.One consequence of that process was seen in the preparationof the World Development Report 2001: Attacking Poverty (WDR 2001).RaviKanbur, the lead author of the report, was selected by then-chief economistJoseph Stiglitz for his willingness to rethink previous orthodoxies.Kanburengaged in an unprecedented amount of consultation outside the bank s usualpolicy circles and widely circulated a controversial draft report.Indeed, thecontroversy led to his resignation and a limited retreat from the positions taken inthe draft.This controversy notwithstanding, the shift we are tracing is notconfined to the 2001 World Development Report and the bank s subsequentrecoil from the report s softer approach.19 It is arguable that elements of thisshift are still clearly visible in the World Development Report 2002: BuildingInstitutions for Markets (WDR 2002).The Washington consensus is a term that became a kind of shorthand for apackage of policies including tight fiscal and monetary policies, freer trade andcapital flows, privatization, deregulation, and openness to foreign directinvestment.These policies were urged on developing countries by the WorldBank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and often imposed throughconditionality clauses in lending arrangements.Many if not all of these policieswere directed towards integrating developing countries into global markets forfinance, investment, and goods and services [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]