Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The Washington Consensus: A post-mortem

Contents:

Author Info

  • McCleery, Robert K.
  • De Paolis, Fernando
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    After guiding development policies for nearly 20 years, the "Washington Consensus" lies in shambles. Although selected components remain relevant for development policies around the world, some specifics of the broader policy "package" and, more generally, the concept of a standardized package of policies applicable to all developing countries has clearly been discredited. Criticism has been directed at the assumed link from economic liberalization of international trade and financial flows to more rapid economic growth. Apart from a handful of developing countries, admittedly including some large and important ones, most of the world saw little of the promised economic benefit from widespread and on-going trade and financial liberalization, initially. Many countries actually regressed, when evaluated against broader socio-economic development goals, including income inequality. We conclude that differences in initial conditions (history, culture, geography and levels of industrial and institutional development) preclude any single development policy package from being universally effective.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W53-4TCYCGM-1/2/601fb36e1e8ad80a65df0640763d65f8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Asian Economics.

    Volume (Year): 19 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 5-6 ()
    Pages: 438-446

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:asieco:v:19:y:2008:i:5-6:p:438-446

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/asieco

    Related research

    Keywords: Trade liberalization Financial liberalization Governance institutions Income inequality Washington Consensus;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Branko Milanovic & Lyn Squire, 2005. "Does Tariff Liberalization Increase Wage Inequality? Some Empirical Evidence," NBER Working Papers 11046, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. David Dollar & Aart Kraay, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages F22-F49, 02.
    3. M. Ayhan Kose & Eswar Prasad & Kenneth S. Rogoff & Shang-Jin Wei, 2006. "Financial Globalization: A Reappraisal," NBER Working Papers 12484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Douglass C. North, 2005. "Introduction to Understanding the Process of Economic Change
      [Understanding the Process of Economic Change]
      ," Introductory Chapters, Princeton University Press.
    5. Williamson, John, 2000. "What Should the World Bank Think about the Washington Consensus?," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 15(2), pages 251-64, August.
    6. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, 2004. "In Defense of Globalization: It Has a Human Face," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 94(6), pages 9-20, November-.
    7. Brigitte Desroches & Michael Francis, 2006. "Institutional Quality, Trade, and the Changing Distribution of World Income," Working Papers 06-19, Bank of Canada.
    8. Aisbett, Emma & Harrison, Ann & Zwane, Alix, 2006. "Globalization and poverty: what is the evidence?," MPRA Paper 36595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Raymond Robertson, 2000. "Trade Liberalisation and Wage Inequality: Lessons from the Mexican Experience," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(6), pages 827-849, 06.
    10. Ann Harrison, 2006. "Globalization and Poverty," NBER Working Papers 12347, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Krueger, Anne O, 1997. "Trade Policy and Economic Development: How We Learn," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(1), pages 1-22, March.
    12. Dollar, David & Kraay, Aart, 2001. "Growth is good for the poor," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2587, The World Bank.
    13. Persson, T. & Tabellini, G., 1993. "Is Inequality Harmful for Growth," Papers 537, Stockholm - International Economic Studies.
    14. Bruton, H.J., 1998. "A Reconsideration of Import Substitution," Center for Development Economics 156, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    15. Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(1), pages 83-116, February.
    16. Henry J. Bruton, 1998. "A Reconsideration of Import Substitution," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 903-936, June.
    17. Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
    18. M. Ayhan Kose & Kenneth Rogoff & Eswar Prasad & Shang-Jin Wei, 2003. "Effects of Financial Globalization on Developing Countries: Some Empirical Evidence," IMF Occasional Papers 220, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Susanne Lütz & Matthias Kranke, 2010. "The European Rescue of the Washington Consensus? EU and IMF Lending to Central and Eastern European Countries," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 22, European Institute, LSE.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:asieco:v:19:y:2008:i:5-6:p:438-446. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.