Apolitical Economy and the Limits to Stakeholder Engagement at the IMF

Abstract

In the world of monetary policy, information asymmetries between decision makers and market actors are widely thought to enhance the efficacy of policy choices. Because of this, discussions of monetary policy have traditionally taken place behind closed doors, and even today the most liberal of disclosure procedures allow only for the post hoc release of limited accounts of discussions (Gutner 2010). In line with these norms, throughout the majority of its life, the IMF — the international organisation charged with overseeing the international coordination of monetary policy — has been accustomed to ‘acting behind the scenes’,² providing advice and conducting negotiations out of the public limelight. Such an operating procedure is diametrically opposed to the calls for greater openness and engagement that are now routinely placed on IOs, and it is for this reason that the politics of stakeholder control at the Fund are of particular interest. Although over the past decade innovations in the relationship between the Fund and low-income country populations have emerged, deeply ingrained institutional characteristics of the Fund continue to restrict the emergence of direct mechanisms of stakeholder engagement. The disjuncture between the Fund’s and its critics’ understandings of appropriate practices in this area means that, almost inevitably, heated disagreements will continue.

Learning to leave my door open was the biggest difficulty in my move from the Fund to the Bank …. At the Fund, everybody’s door is closed.

(Senior Economist, World Bank International Policy and Partnerships Group 2008)¹

Fund staff should be prepared to share their analyses and key elements of their policy positions in the [Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper] consultative process …. Missions should learn from the policy dialogue.

(IMF 1999a: 1)