BRETTON WOODS ® update A DIGEST OF INFORMATION AND ACTION ON THE WORLD BANK AND IMF advances from orthodox Bank approaches. But questions remain WDR resignation embarrasses Bank about whose voices count in such reports and what are the limits to World Bank openness. In late May Ravi Kanbur resigned from his position as World Development Report lead For future WDRs, including the 2002 report on sustainable develop- author following attempts by Bank and government officials to make him change his text. ment, the Bank will again have to WWW.BRETTONWOODSPROJECT.ORG When this story broke in mid-June, the ensuing controversy opened up important debates clarify their purpose and process. Two years ago Bank President James about policy priorities and about the World Bank’s role in producing research. Wolfensohn stated in a letter to the Bretton Woods Project that “I view The World Development Report is was committed to garnering and commentators had welcomed this WDRs as being one of the Bank’s crit- the Bank’s leading annual publica- including a range of views. He wrote more balanced approach but argued ical instruments for dialogue with tion, with a major influence on to the Bretton Woods Project soon that, having acknowledged the the development community at development thinking and opera- after he took the job clarifying that “I importance of political factors, the large. I have also emphasized that tions worldwide. In recent years the would not submit to any substan- report needed to do more to iden- we should not just be reciting Bank has gradually opened up the tive editing I did not agree with”. tify the major local, national and generic answers but raising funda- process of producing the reports, Bridging the gap between those who global obstacles to pro-poor actions. mental questions to which there are encouraging NGOs and researchers approved of much of his first draft Ironically the WDR editing process no easy answers”. Neither aim is at to submit evidence and comments while calling for certain aspects to has now neatly revealed why it is so present being realised. ® during drafting. For this year’s major be taken further, and those who hard for poorer people to have their decadal report on poverty the Bank wanted to reorder and dilute it was voices heard in global institutions. ∑www.worldbank.org allocated significant extra time and always hard. It became impossible Joe Ritzen, Bank Vice President in /poverty/wdrpoverty resources for such exercises and once pressure, rather than reasoned charge of the report pledged “the ∑www.brettonwoodsproject.org hired former Bank official, now Cor- argument, was brought to bear. World Bank is committed to both /brief/wdrproc.html nell University Professor, Ravi Kan- Those in the Bank and donor open debate and an internal process 18 bur to lead the team. governments who wanted to tone that maintains the integrity of the Kanbur impressed many with the down the report were concerned WDR, in which the final product “The tussle about what the WDR energy and enthusiasm he brought about the order of the WDR’s main reflects the best evidence and judge- should and should not emphasize AUGUST 2000 AUGUST to the challenge of listening to “pillars”, in particular the relative ment of the staff, as well as the wide demonstrates that there are diverse evidence and opinions, and importance of the sections on range of external commentary. The forces inside and outside the by publishing the report’s first draft opportunity (the role of markets report will in the end be a product of World Bank hostile to even a on the web. and economic growth) and empow- the World Bank.” modest modification of the domi- Senior Bank and shareholder gov- erment (responsiveness of state Many of those involved in the nant paradigm on development. ernment officials, however, became institutions to citizens, and the role WDR drafting process are likely to The Bank may want to signal concerned about the report’s mes- of organisations of the poor). produce commentaries on the final that it is turning into a caring sages on key policies and tried to The January draft suggested that text when it is published in early organization but, like a leopard force Kanbur to make changes in developing countries need to September. The open initial draft- and its spots, it cannot change order and content. Kanbur had, how- approach market liberalisation cau- ing process followed by the public even if it wants to.” ever, made quite clear—for example tiously, taking active measures to controversy during June and July The Hindu, 26 June, 2000 by arranging extra trips to meet address institutional change, social may have helped ensure that the More comments on page 2 African and Indian NGOs —that he protection and inequality. Many final draft contains significant “The World Bank ’s ham-fisted interventions in Tibet have seriously compromised Tibetan diplomacy ” – page 3 Globalization critics confront Bank . 2 Annual meetings plans . 5 Net Gateway discussions move forward . 2 Kenyan MPs urge aid halt . 5 Report slams Bank/Fund corruption agendas . 3 Misleading studies bad for the poor . 6 Governance work examined . 3 Köhler seeks independent, focused IMF . 6 China project shakes Bank . 3 G7 to impose architecture agenda . 6 Indians threatened by loan failure . 4 Protests in Argentina, Turkey, Ecuador . 7 Chad-Cameroon latest . 4 Mozambique sugar industry threatened by IMF . 7 Assessment policies under review . 4 Protests at India power price rise . 7 Major AIDS funding made available . 4 Slovaks angry at WB-IMF collusion . 7 Development and environment strategies . .5 UN collaboration with Bank and Fund condemned . 8 Report on transition safety nets . 5 PLUS: New books on: global finance, Brazil and IMF “If the IMF forces these impositions on the government, the result will be the closure of the factories” – page 7 BRETTON WOODS UPDATE NUMBER 18 / AUGUST 2000 “The Washington Consensus has “A rare individual has the courage to Comments on emerged from the Asia Crisis with its resign,but what about the thou- Bank’s Net Gateway faith in free markets only slightly sands who don’t? We need to discussions move Ravi Kanbur’s shaken.Poverty eradication is now question all reports and documents the menu, but the main dish is still and data coming from the World forward resignation growth and market liberalisation, Bank which the media and others A number of discussions took place with social safety nets added as a use as their source of truth about the in June and July on the World Bank’s side dish, and social capital scat- South.This is the tip of the iceberg of proposed Global Development Gate- tered over it as a relish.The overall the reports that are produced under “Everyone is shocked and deeply way internet portal initiative (see implication of the resignation is such intense politicization” saddened that Ravi left.Many of us Update, June 2000). Meetings hosted fairly clear.The US does not want Michael Goldman, editor Privatising Nature, see this as a real blow to the empow- by the Institute for Development the World Bank to stray too far from Political Struggles for the Global Commons erment agenda; and if I’ve learned Studies (IDS), Department for Inter- its agenda of economic growth and anything from my work it’s about national Development (DFID) and market liberalisation.Ravi Kanbur’s "At the World Bank, the high church the powerlessness of being poor.” OneWorld Europe, plus an internet draft has raised a few too many of development economics, a World Bank source discussion hosted by Bellanet doubts about this agenda, and widening schism over how to fight (www.bellanet.org), gave opportuni- strayed too much towards politics.” poverty is sending ripples around “Ravi Kanbur has recently decided to ties to raise questions and concerns. The Nation, Bangkok, 5 July, 2000 the world.Ravi Kanbur, a top Cor- leave his position as Staff Director of The DFID meeting included senior nell economist and the man hired by the World Development Report UK and Bank officials as well as NGO “To keep the Bank afloat Wolfen- the bank to oversee the writing of “Attacking Poverty.”Ravi’s decision and university staff. Many critical sohn has to steer between two its World Development Report, is a source of regret for the Report’s points were raised, including who major constituencies.The first are resigned in anger recently when he team, for colleagues in the Bank and will govern the design and imple- the critics, the second is the US Trea- was ordered to rewrite his staff's for many people outside the Bank mentation of the Gateway, whether sury.You don’t need to be a World draft.The report is extremely influ- who have been working on the WDR. the proposal is too big and ambi- Bank economist to do the cost bene- ential among economists, and Mr. In leaving Ravi said he had some tious, whether disadvantaged groups fit analysis.To save the Bank, and Kanbur's version questioned how reservations on the emphasis of the such as indigenous people would be his own reputation, it is essential well developing countries adapt to main messages that were likely to able to get their messages across. that the Bank’s policies and public capitalism.In fact, it questioned emerge in the final version of the The Bank team agreed that further pronouncements do not err too far whether the West's standard pre- Report.We believe these reserva- discussion was needed on many of from its main shareholder and polit- scription for reform does enough to tions to be unfounded.” these and called for suggestions on ical protector, the US Treasury.” help the poor." Jo Ritzen, Vice President, Development Economics, how a comprehensive global con- World Bank Focus on Trade, Number 51, June 2000 Joseph Kahn, New York Times, 25 June, 2000 sultations process can be organised.