Abstract
In the wake of several major crises, in which it played a highly controversial role, the IMF has recently come under heavy fire from various quarters. A number of proposals for reform have been put forward, of which the report of the Meltzer Commission has attracted particularly widespread attention. The authors analyze this and some competing reform proposals using the “trilemma of economic integration”, which the US Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, suggested as a common framework for investigation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
See for this line of argument e.g. Anne O. Krueger: Whither the World Bank and the IMF?, in: Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 36, No. 4, 1998, pp. 1983–2020.
The report can be downloaded from http://phantom-y.gsia. cmu.edu/IFIAC; for a short summary of the report and critical review of the underlying analytical foundations see Michael Frenkel, Lukas Menkhoff: Welchem Rezept folgt Meltzers IWF-Diät?, in: Wirtschaftsdienst, Vol. 80, No. 4, 2000, pp. 218–224.
See Lawrence H. Summers: Reflections on Managing Global Integration, in: Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1999, pp. 3–18.
For a longer exposition and application to the present discussion see Michael Frenkel, Lukas Menkhoff: Stabile Weltfinanzen? Die Debatte um eine neue internationale Finanzarchitektur, Berlin 2000.
See Lawrence H. Summers, op. cit. Reflections on Managing Global Integration, in: Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1999, pp. 10 f.
See e.g. Sebastian Edwards: Abolish the IMF, in: Financial Times, 13. 11. 1998.
The most comprehensive document in this respect is the commissioned study by Kevin Watkins: Der IWF, Falsche Diagnose—falsche Medizin, Oxfam, WEED, March 2000 (english edition published in 1999).
The quotes are taken from Kevin Waltkins: Reforming the IMF, Oxfam, March 2000, p. 5.
Joseph E. Stiglitz: Reforming the Global Economic Architecture: Lessons from Recent Crises, in: Journal of Finance, Vol. 54, No. 4, 1999, pp. 1508–1521.
See Joseph E. Stiglitz, op. cit. Reforming the Global Economic Architecture: Lessons from Recent Crises, in: Journal of Finance, Vol. 54, No. 4, 1999, p. 1513.
See for this approach Michael Frenkel, Lukas Menkhoff: Stabile Weltfinanzen? Die Debatte um eine neue internationale Finanzarchitektur, Berlin 2000, pp. 10 ff.
A short description of most proposals can be found in Kenneth Rogoff: International Institutions for Reducing Global Financial Instability, in: Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 4, 1999. pp. 21–42; see also Stanley Fischer in the same journal and Richard N. Cooper: A Monetary System for the Future, in: Foreign Affairs, Vol. 63, 1984, pp. 166–184.
See John Eatwell, Lance Taylor: Towards an Effective Regulation of International Capital Markets, in: International Politics and Society, No. 3, 1999, pp. 279–286.
Among them are Barry Eichengreen: Toward a New International Financial Architecture, A Practical Post-Asia Agenda, Washington, D.C., 1999, and the Council on Foreign Relations Independent Task Force Report, Safeguarding Prosperity in a Global Financial System, 1999 (download at: www.foreignrelations.org).
From the outside this looks like a confirmation of the opinion expressed by Jagdish Bhagwati: The Capital Myth, The Difference between Trade in Widgets and Dollars, in: Foreign Affairs, Vol. 77, No. 3, 1998, pp. 7–12.
See Stanley Fischer: Presentation to the International Financial Institution Advisory Commission, 2. 2. 2000, on the IFIAC’s webpage. see footnote 2.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Frenkel, M., Menkhoff, L. An analysis of competing IMF reform proposals. Intereconomics 35, 107–113 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02927195
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02927195