Whatever Inconsistencies and Effects? Explaining the Resilience of the Policy Reforms Applied to Developing Countries
Language
en
Article de revue
This item was published in
Forum for Social Economics. 2015, vol. 44, p. 159-178
Taylor and Francis Online
English Abstract
Why is ‘neoliberalism’ still a predominant framework within economics and policymaking? The paper considers the mix of theoretical assumptions, causalities and policies known as the ‘Washington consensus’, focusing on ...Read more >
Why is ‘neoliberalism’ still a predominant framework within economics and policymaking? The paper considers the mix of theoretical assumptions, causalities and policies known as the ‘Washington consensus’, focusing on developing countries. Firstly, it analyses their main elements, resilience and effects (the ‘lost decades in spite of policy reform’). Secondly, it examines the reasons of this resilience and argues that a reason is their adaptive capacity via constant exchanges between facts and conceptual assumptions, because this mix is constituted of heterogeneous elements (from neoclassical theory, ad hoc models or empirics-based policymaking): inconsistency is a core feature and as such its correction is irrelevant. These ‘adaptive inconsistencies’ are consolidated by the simultaneous theoretical/policy dimension of the mix. Its cognitive resilience is reinforced by the irrefutability of causations and the cause/effect time lag (‘after current costs, there will be gains’, e.g., growth), and is not challenged by the social costs of policies.Read less <
English Keywords
Public policy
international financial institutions
developing countries
Origin
Hal importedCollections