Although the IMF is often accused (and rightly so) of taking a “one-size fits all” approach to its economic prescriptions and fiscal programs, scholars remind us that the process and effects of liberalization are highly localized. Your assignment is to discuss a national-level story of economic liberalization and structural adjustment. How do local politics and cultures filter, shape, and adapt the global policies of liberalization and structural adjustment programs. Begin by choosing a country that has undergone IMF/World Bank imposed structural adjustment since the 1980s. Discuss the process and effects of liberalization in this place. How did it come to be that this country embarked on a structural adjustment/ liberalization program? Who supported this program within the country? Who opposed it? Were the open debates and public discussions about the adoption of deregulation and austerity measures? Did citizens have the opportunity to vote or weigh in on the reforms? Were there public protests or the airing of public grievances when they were adopted? And what effects do the reforms appear to have had? There are likely many different opinions about whether the reforms appear to have been a success or not. But reading through the competing conclusions, what does the evidence suggest to you about the effects of structural adjustment on this country or its citizens? Write a 4 -5 page (double spaced) paper discussing the local causes and consequences of structural adjustment on a country of your choosing.
The post Although the IMF is often accused (and rightly so) of taking a “one-size fits all” approach to its economic prescriptions and fiscal programs, scholars remind us that the process and effects appeared first on Essaybrook.
