Chile has shown in Latin America that an open economy can detach itself from the vicissitudes of its neighbors. It also has shown that it delivers growth. However, other countries in Latin America have considered reinventing the ALALC strategy of the sixties, a strategy of opening to regional trade while closing itself to trade outside the region. Chile followed that strategy at some point. How did it get from there to here? How is the political economics of the reform from an ISI strategy to an open economy? Is there a role for IFIs in that process? This paper discusses Chilean economic policy choices in the period 1950-1973, the period of the import substitution industrialization (ISI) strategy. The ISI model rested on two main pillars: a closed economy (high tariff barriers, quotas and exchange controls) and a strong role for the state (government expenditure as a large share of GDP, extensive regulations and an increasing presence of state-owned firms). Particular emphasis is put on trying to explain how the ISI strategy was sustained and what led to its demise. The framework of interpretation provided in the paper is also applied to Uruguay, in an attempt to gauge its capacity to interpret what happened in another Latin American country. Policy is endongenous, and hence reform is endogenous. Credibility can affect the chances of reform to succeed. According to the reasoning presented here, a key issue is to study the factors that affect the equilibrium rent extraction rate. There are many incentives to announce and then reverse a liberalization program. If investors believe in reform, and invest, then there is a short run boost to GDP, and then investors a repartially expropriated by the reversal (since without the liberalization their project was not profitable). Hence announcements are not credible unless signaling of commitment is present. This paper argues there is a role for IFIs in this process but that the loan size and the amount of conditionality are key in making the liberalization process credible. If the size is too small or there is not enough conditionality, then the rent seeking government will fool both the investors and the IFI by getting the investment, the loan, and not reforming. Investors know this moral hazard problem and hence invest less than expected initially, making the elasticity of supply to the RER lower, and making the optimal RER higher. The signaling of commitment is key to triggering investment. But if IFIs get into the problem and are unable to sustain conditionality or estimate the adequate size of the loan, then IFIs will lose credibility and this signaling device will be devoid of utility. IFIs can solve the time inconsistency problem faced by rent seeking governments that results in very low investment. However, if the donor agencies become unreliable in enforcing conditionality, they will result in countries free riding on the signal, the signal losing credibility, and IFIs will lose the ability to perform the role. This is a common property problem: each country individually would rather the IFI enforce the conditionality for all other countries and not for itself. If the negotiation process in the IFI permits this to occur sufficient times all are worse off since then a signaling device is lost.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. in its series Documentos de Trabajo with number
257.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Verónica Gil).
Related research
Keywords:
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.:
Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994.
"Protection for Sale,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-50, September.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1992.
"Protection For Sale,"
NBER Working Papers
4149, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Torsten Persson & Gerard Roland & Guido Tabellini, .
"Comparative Politics and Public Finance,"
Working Papers
114, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
[Downloadable!]
Did you know? You can create a compilation of all publications of a group of people, say alumni of a program, your students or memers of an association.