Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T23:05:29.333Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The International Bank in Political Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2011

David A. Baldwin
David A. Baldwin
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor of Government at Dartmouth College
Get access

Extract

Although the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development has been in existence for nearly two decades, the political aspects of its activities have received scant attention. Most of the literature on IBRD operations has been written by economists, who quite naturally emphasize the economic aspects. Political scientists, to the extent that they have discussed it at all, have described most of its operations as removed “from the sphere of international or domestic politics.” The purpose of the following analysis is to determine in what respects the activities of the International Bank may be described as “political.” Such a determination would be useful in three ways. First, it would, it is hoped, stimulate research on international organizations as actors in international politics; second, it would require revision of the standard explanations of the evolution of international development aid programs; and third, it would aid in evaluating the argument for more multilateral aid which assumes that such aid is “nonpolitical.”

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , October 1965 , pp. 68 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Montgomery, John D., The Politics of Foreign Aid (New York 1962), 184Google Scholar.

2 Ibid., 182.

3 Ibid., 184.

4 For examples of standard explanations see the following: Alec Cairncross, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Essays in International Finance, No. 33 (Princeton 1959)Google Scholar; and Snider, Delbert A., Introduction to International Economics (Homewood, Ill., 1954), 426–37Google Scholar.

5 IBRD, Articles of Agreement, Article III, Sec. 4 (ii). (Italics added.)

6 Ibid., Sec. 4 (vii).

7 See, for example, the comments by Harlan Cleveland in his introduction to Jackson, Robert G. A., The Case for an International Development Authority (Syracuse 1959), 7Google Scholar; and Stebbins, Richard P., The United States in World Affairs, 1958 (New York 1959). 404Google Scholar.

8 Elliott, William Y., and others, The Political Economy of American Foreign Policy (New York 1955), 343Google Scholar.

9 Cairncross, 18.

10 Few economists have discussed the economic insignificance of the project approach. The best discussion is in Schelling, Thomas C., International Economics (Boston 1958), 439–56Google Scholar.

11 For an example of such criticism of the IBRD see Maxwell Graduate School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, The Operational Aspects of United States Foreign Policy, U.S. Foreign Policy Study No. 6 (86th Cong., 1st Sess., 1959). 52Google Scholar

12 IBRD, Policies and Operations of the World Bank, IFC, and IDA (Washington 1962), 33Google Scholar.

13 IBRD, Third Annual Report, 1947–1948, 16.

14 IBRD, Policies and Operations, 32. (Italics added.)

15 Cf. Schelling, 456–57.

16 IBRD, Articles of Agreement, Article IV, Sec. 3.

17 IBRD, Second Annual Report, 1946–1947, 15–18.

18 IBRD, Policies and Operations, 38.

19 Ibid., 32.

20 Article IV, Sec. 10.

21 IBRD, Policies and Operations, 47.

22 The Strategy of Conflict (Cambridge, Mass., 1960), 5Google Scholar.

23 Professor Machlup has argued that this is a sensible way to conceive the borrowerlender situation. See Machlup, Fritz, “Three Concepts of the Balance of Payments and the So-Called Dollar Shortage,” Economic Journal, LX (March 1950), 56–58Google Scholar.

24 On this point see Dahl, Robert A., Modern Political Analysis (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1963), 39–54Google Scholar.

25 p. 8.

26 p. 21.

27 Strategy of Conflict, 22.

28 IBRD, Second Annual Report, 14.

29 IBRD, Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Board of Governors, Summary Proceedings (1956)Google Scholar, 12–13; Second Annual Report, 13–14; Third Annual Report, 15–16; Policies and Operations, 40–41.

30 IBRD, Second Annual Report, 13; IBRD, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 1946–1953 (Baltimore 1954), 54Google Scholar (this is an early version of Policies and Operations, and is cited here to illustrate the continuity of bank thinking; contrary to widespread belief, there is very little difference between the 1954 and 1962 editions of this book); Policies and Operations, 41.

31 Morris, James, The Road to Huddersfield (New York 1963), 43Google Scholar; IBRD, IBRD, 1946–1953, 49, 54–55; Policies and Operations, 37, 41–42.

32 IBRD, Fourth Annual Report, 1948–1949, 8; Second Annual Report, 13; IBRD, 1946–1953, 43–44, 54, 61; Policies and Operations, 31–32, 40–42, 47.

33 IBRD, Third Annual Report, 16; IBRD, 1946–1953, 44–45; Policies and Operations 32–38.

34 Snider, 435.

35 Cairncross, 6.

36 Ibid., 31

37 Matecki, B. E., Establishment of the International Finance Corporation and United States Policy (New York 1957), 162Google Scholar.

38 Asher, Robert E., and others, The United Nations and Economic and Social Cooperation (Washington 1957), 166Google Scholar.