Reinsberg Flashcards
(10 cards)
What is the main argument of Reinsberg et al. (2022)?
IMF-imposed neoliberal reforms—particularly privatisation, deregulation, and austerity—fuel corruption in developing countries by weakening state capacity and incentivising elites and bureaucrats to engage in rent-seeking.
What do the authors say about the IMF’s claims?
They challenge the IMF’s claim that reforms reduce corruption, arguing instead that such reforms often do the opposite—especially in weak, unequal states where elites can capture the benefits.
Why do neoliberal reforms lead to more corruption, according to the authors?
Because they concentrate economic losses and open up opportunities for elites to exploit state assets, while undermining public institutions and demotivating bureaucrats (e.g. via wage cuts).
Why does this article matter in development and global governance debates?
It challenges the mainstream idea that global institutions like the IMF promote development, instead showing how global governance can entrench inequality and corruption in the Global South.
What example does the article give about privatisation in Russia?
Well-connected elites gained massive wealth during IMF-supported privatisation, while most citizens were left behind—illustrating elite capture and unequal distribution.
What happened in Burundi under IMF reforms?
The IMF imposed a civil service wage cap, leading to frustration and increased corruption among public officials trying to compensate for lost income.
What did IMF conditionality mean for the Philippines?
Reforms forced the removal of import protections and foreign banking restrictions, undermining domestic industries and creating openings for corruption and foreign dominance.
What theoretical perspective supports Reinsberg et al.’s argument?
Their critique aligns with dependency theory and world-systems theory, which argue that externally imposed reforms often worsen inequality and exploit periphery nations.
What is the IMF’s counterclaim?
The IMF argues that structural reforms reduce corruption by limiting rents, improving efficiency, and shrinking the public sector. But Reinsberg et al. say this only works under strong governance—which many developing states lack.
What broader lesson can we learn from this article?
That development strategies must consider political and institutional context—top-down, one-size-fits-all neoliberal reforms can backfire in fragile states by entrenching rather than dismantling corruption.
