This course is part of the SDG initiative <http://www.sdginitiative.org/> addressing the UN Sustainable Development Goals, specifically for the following SDGs [1, 8, 10 and 16]. We hope you will join in our efforts to reach the SDG’s in small but measurable and actionable ways, cooperating with Development Done Differently. Expand your impact. You can create a better world. In today’s world, politics and economics are interconnected, but what is the nature of this connectivity? What are the power relationships that shape the world economy today and create new challenges for international institutions facing globalization? What makes some countries wealthier than others? Do we face cultural diversity or fragmentation? Does the type of governance effect economic development and social change or is it the other way around? How do we measure it and how trustworthy is the data? These issues and many more will be examined in this course along with a wide library of sources and a biting criticism.
Finance
Loading...
En provenance du cours de Universiteit Leiden
Political Economy of Institutions and Development
132 notes
Explorer les vidéos de cours associées
Vous trouverez chez Coursera les meilleures vidéos de cours du monde. Voici quelques-unes de nos recommandations personnalisées pour vous
À partir de la leçon
International organizations
International organization. What role do they play in the world economy?
Rencontrer les enseignants
Richard Thomas GriffithsProf. dr.
Faculty of Humanities
Hello again, in the last video
we saw the stillbirth of the International Trade Organization.
In its place, World Trade came under the remit of the GAT,
which succeeded in reducing industrial protection.
But, not much else.
The efforts of less developed countries to link
trade policy to development and UNCTAD also failed.
And finally, we witnessed the emergence of
the WTO with a wider remit and stronger capacities.
It still has to demonstrate what it's capable of.
But in this video, we're going to look at
the attempts to manage the world's financial system.
Now, in July 1944 delegates from 44 countries met at a resort hotel in New Hampshire
and established a new regime for
the world's financial system that still bears its name: The Bretton Woods system.
It was designed to prevent a re-occurrence of the problems that bedeviled the 1930s,
at least from the American viewpoint.
Now, after the financial crisis in 1931,
many countries had controlled access to foreign currency
and this had allowed them to manipulate their trade for political purposes i.e.
for warfare. So the first thing the Americans insisted
upon was that all currencies become freely convertible into each other.
At the same time, the dollar was made convertible to
gold at an exchange rate of thirty two dollars an ounce.
So, in this way all currencies were also linked to gold.
The Americans were also obsessed for what they call competitive devaluation.
When a dollar devalued in 1933,
sterling which it devalued 1931,
drifted downwards as well and so maintained its competitive advantage.
So, the new system was to be based on fixed exchange rates.
Parities were to be maintained within very small and very strictly defined limits.
Any deviation from them,
would only be allowed in exceptional circumstances.
So, finally, to prevent companies being forced
to devalue because of speculation against their currencies,
A fund, an International Monetary Fund
the IMF was established from which they could borrow.
The fund was funded by contributions from the member states.
So, this was the system that managed the world economy until the early 1970s.
And in terms of managing exchange rates it seemed pretty
successful at least between the main trading currencies: the dollar,
the sterling and the main European currencies.
After a massive exchange rate realignment and 1949,
exchange rates remain remarkably stable.
French devaluations 1957-58, a small German revaluation 1961,
Sterling devaluation 1967, French devaluation, German revaluation 1969.
But the rules had never been fully implemented.
First of all, European countries had maintained currency controls even on
commercial transactions until 1959
and controls over capital movements persisted until the 1980s.
Secondly, from the early 1960s dollars began entering the system at
a faster rate than central banks were willing to accumulate them.
The causes of the dollar deficits were several:
American inflation was higher than that of its main competitors,
the government was spending more than it raised in taxes,
American firms were investing abroad.
But the effect was to allow the build up of
stateless capital in the hands of financial institutions.
Now, there's a nice little concept in institutional economics called credible commitment.
Basically, it means that,
"I will believe that you are going to do what you say you are doing,
when I see that you are doing what you say."
What happens next is a good example.
Since American policies were quite plainly not
consistent with those necessary to maintain the exchange rate,
speculation built up against the dollar.
1971, the American suspended convertibility.
And, a few months later devalued the currency as part of
a currency realignment similar to that of 1949.
For a while, it looked as though the system might just hold together.
But by 1973, most countries had let
their currency float against each other and
the regime of fixed exchange rate came to an end.
Now, the only part of the system that remained was the fund itself,
intervening to help countries with foreign payments problems
and helping them to get back on their feet towards a sustainable future,
or at least that's the official version.
Critics of the Fund,
accused it to protecting the interests of international finance, bankers,
and speculators and of pushing all the burden of
re-adjustment onto the shoulders of those least able to bear it.
What the IMF does is to offer financial assistance,
negotiate a deal with creditors,
and my pension fund is somewhere in that mixture,
and insist on stabilizing fiscal and monetary policy.
And often using the opportunity to impose some other reforms.
All of these things involve some temporary surrender of
sovereignty and that is generally resented.
Certainly, when the conditions attached to the aid packages are painful.
The IMF therefore, is seen as being undemocratic and
bullying and seems itself to be unaccountable to anyone.
On the other hand, time is not usually a luxury people have in
crisis situations and financial crisis and no exception.
Criticism is sharper when it extends to the measures imposed.
In almost every crisis,
government expenditure is too high and so is the level of inflation.
The correction however is painful.
The criticism is often that the IMF measures are too fast and too
severe that the downward pressure placed on the real economy actually impairs recovery.
The Criticism for example,
is levy that measures imposed on Greece.
Further criticism is that some of the measures imposed are
much further and are actually necessary to restore equilibrium,
but impinge on a country's freedom to choose their own development strategies.
The funds pro-market policies often demand the sale
of public assets and reforms in tax and subsidy structures.
Now, I actually lived through the IMF reforms imposed on the United Kingdom in 1976.
The currency was collapsing and inflation had reached an annual rate of 30 percent.
As part of the measures to cut expenditure,
the IMF forced the government to impose a public sector pay freeze.
Real wages shrank. So did mine.
In the winter of 1978 a reaction set in
the form of a series of debilitating public sector strikes.
The electricity workers, the dustmen,
the firemen and other emergency services all ground to a halt.
It was a thoroughly depressing experience and I resented every moment of it.
But, I do admit it did mark a turning point. Let's sum up now.
In this lecture we've seen how the management to
the financial system was intended to avoid a re-occurrence of the 1930s.
We reviewed its main features,
we saw how it existed until the early 1970s.
We then saw how the world switched to a regime of
floating exchange rates and how the IMF was the only element to continue.
To continue as a fund to relieve countries with acute payments problems.
We then reviewed the criticisms levied at the fund of its operations.
Now, in the next video,
we'll pull together some of the ideas surrounding
the effects of international organizations on state behavior.
Explorer notre catalogue
Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.
Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde,
en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.
© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.
