Managing the Faustian bargain: monetary autonomy in the pursuit of development in Eastern Europe and Latin America

International capital markets have grown to be a major force shaping today's world economy, presenting a range of opportunities and threats to developing countries. Capital market liberalization created large pools of much-needed capital that developing economies could access, but tapping these funds often came at the cost of increasing economic vulnerability, lost policy-making autonomy and a range of structural distortions that could ultimately undermine development in the long-term. As the potential threats of integrating one's country into global capital markets has become apparent, countries have devised a range of strategies to buffer themselves from the strains of global capital markets. This article considers the pursuit of monetary autonomy with reference to a typology of the strategies that policy-makers can use to open their markets to international capital, while simultaneously attempting to buffer themselves from the economic and political pressures of global financial integration. Such autonomy can be purchased in a myriad of ways, and a discussion of the choices facing Latin American and Eastern European countries is presented.capital market liberalization; monetary autonomy; financial policy; financial system stability

Neoliberalism and patterns of economic performance: 1980 to 2000

Neoliberal discourse often produces the impression that the world has undergone a wholesale shift toward laissez-faire and that this shift has produced economic prosperity. This article examines national economic data to discern the degree to which (1) governments have in fact retreated from the market and (2) countries have enjoyed increasing economic prosperity over a period in which they have supposedly been liberalizing. The evidence is mixed on both counts. Although international capital mobility and trade liberalism appears to have grown over the past two decades, there is little evidence of a broad scaling back of governments. Over the same period, countries have not experienced any appreciable improvement in growth, cross-national equality, employment, or national debt loads, although there is some evidence of improved price stability near the end of the 1990s.trade; neoliberalism; structural adjustment; Latin America; economy; transfers; budget; spending

Hospital implementation of health information technology and quality of care: are they related?

Recently, there has been considerable effort to promote the use of health information technology (HIT) in order to improve health care quality. However, relatively little is known about the extent to which HIT implementation is associated with hospital patient care quality. We undertook this study to determine the association of various HITs with: hospital quality improvement (QI) practices and strategies; adherence to process of care measures; risk-adjusted inpatient mortality; patient satisfaction; and assessment of patient care quality by hospital quality managers and front-line clinicians.This work was supported by a grant from the Commonwealth Fund. We are indebted to Anthony Shih and Anne-Marie Audet of the Fund for their advice, support, and constructive suggestions throughout the design and conduct of the study. We thank our colleagues - Raymond Kang, Peter Kralovec, Sally Holmes, Frances Margolin, and Deborah Bohr - for their valuable contributions to the development of the QAS, the CPS, and the database on which the analytic findings reported here were based. We also thank 3 M (TM) Health Information Systems' for use of its All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRGs) software. We especially wish to thank Jennifer Drake for her contributions not only to survey development, but also to earlier analysis of survey findings relevant to this paper. (Commonwealth Fund)Published versio

Managing the Faustian bargain: monetary autonomy in the pursuit of development in Eastern Europe and Latin America

International capital markets have grown to be a major force shaping today's world economy, presenting a range of opportunities and threats to developing countries. Capital market liberalization created large pools of much-needed capital that developing economies could access, but tapping these funds often came at the cost of increasing economic vulnerability, lost policy-making autonomy and a range of structural distortions that could ultimately undermine development in the long-term. As the potential threats of integrating one's country into global capital markets has become apparent, countries have devised a range of strategies to buffer themselves from the strains of global capital markets. This article considers the pursuit of monetary autonomy with reference to a typology of the strategies that policy-makers can use to open their markets to international capital, while simultaneously attempting to buffer themselves from the economic and political pressures of global financial integration. Such autonomy can be purchased in a myriad of ways, and a discussion of the choices facing Latin American and Eastern European countries is presented

Neoliberalism’s relationship with economic growth in the developing world: Was it the power of the market or the resolution of financial crisis?

This article examines the relationship between "economic freedom" and economic growth. Previous studies have found a positive relationship between economic growth rates and "economic freedom", and used this relationship as a basis for arguing that more liberal economic policies promote development. "Economic freedom" conflates laissez-faire policy with other important concepts, like good governance and macroeconomic stability. When laissez-faire is parsed from these other concepts, it shows no positive relationship with growth outside of the early-1990s, a period in which financially-strained developing governments and financial systems enjoyed debt bailouts in exchange for liberalization reforms. Further analysis shows that laissez-faire exerts no discernible effect on economic growth net of the debt relief, inflation containment and improved inward investment that occurred after the Cold War. I argue that free market capitalism itself may not have promoted economic development in the post-Cold War era. Instead, free market reforms occurred alongside domestic and international political developments that helped developing countries resolve a serious financial crises, and that the resolution of these crises were most important in explaining the comparative prosperity of the 1990s and 2000s

“Economic freedom” and economic growth: questioning the claim that freer markets make societies more prosperous

A conventional reading of economic history implies that free market reforms rescued the world’s economies from stagnancy during the 1970s and 1980s. I reexamine a well-established econometric literature linking economic freedom to growth, and argue that their positive findings hinge on two problems: conceptual conflation and ahistoricity. When these criticisms are taken seriously, a very different view of the historical record emerges. There does not appear to be enduring relationship between economic liberalism and growth. Much of the observed relationship between these two variables involves a one-shot transition to freer markets around the Cold War’s end. Several concurrent changes took place in this historical context, and it is hasty to conclude that it was market liberalization alone that produced the economic turnaround of the 1990s and early-2000s. I also question market fundamentalists’ view that all forms of liberalization are helpful, arguing that the data show little to no benefit from reforms that did not attract foreign investment

“Economic freedom” and economic growth: questioning the claim that freer markets make societies more prosperous

A conventional reading of economic history implies that free market reforms rescued the world’s economies from stagnancy during the 1970s and 1980s. I reexamine a well-established econometric literature linking economic freedom to growth, and argue that their positive findings hinge on two problems: conceptual conflation and ahistoricity. When these criticisms are taken seriously, a very different view of the historical record emerges. There does not appear to be enduring relationship between economic liberalism and growth. Much of the observed relationship between these two variables involves a one-shot transition to freer markets around the Cold War’s end. Several concurrent changes took place in this historical context, and it is hasty to conclude that it was market liberalization alone that produced the economic turnaround of the 1990s and early-2000s. I also question market fundamentalists’ view that all forms of liberalization are helpful, arguing that the data show little to no benefit from reforms that did not attract foreign investment

Neoliberalism’s relationship with economic growth in the developing world: Was it the power of the market or the resolution of financial crisis?

Between 1995 and 2007, the world’s economies embraced neoliberal reforms and prospered, a coincidence that is often taken as proof that liberal economies grow faster. A large body of econometric research shows that “freer” economies are more prosperous. I levy two methodological criticisms at this literature that ultimately render a very different picture of pro-market reforms’ relationship with growth. My analysis suggests that neoliberal reforms did not significantly affect growth where they did not ease public financing or encourage foreign investment. The evidence does not suggest that the economic prosperity of the past 20 years is due to economic liberalism per se, but rather the developing world enjoying stabilized macrofinancial systems and a global investment boom. Neoliberal reforms may have helped produce this stability and investment, but systemic financial stabilization was only one of several goals that they pursued. A sober interpretation of the data finds little evidence for believing that economies will prosper as they embrace laissez-faire ideals

Neoliberalism’s relationship with economic growth in the developing world: Was it the power of the market or the resolution of financial crisis?

This article examines the relationship between "economic freedom" and economic growth. Previous studies have found a positive relationship between economic growth rates and "economic freedom", and used this relationship as a basis for arguing that more liberal economic policies promote development. "Economic freedom" conflates laissez-faire policy with other important concepts, like good governance and macroeconomic stability. When laissez-faire is parsed from these other concepts, it shows no positive relationship with growth outside of the early-1990s, a period in which financially-strained developing governments and financial systems enjoyed debt bailouts in exchange for liberalization reforms. Further analysis shows that laissez-faire exerts no discernible effect on economic growth net of the debt relief, inflation containment and improved inward investment that occurred after the Cold War. I argue that free market capitalism itself may not have promoted economic development in the post-Cold War era. Instead, free market reforms occurred alongside domestic and international political developments that helped developing countries resolve a serious financial crises, and that the resolution of these crises were most important in explaining the comparative prosperity of the 1990s and 2000s

Is “economic freedom” strictly free market capitalism? A decompositional analysis of the Economic Freedom of the World index

The Frasier Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World is often taken as a metric of market capitalism. This paper argues that the index is an amalgam of measures capturing free markets and good governance, and analysts should remain cognizant of this conceptual conflation when using the index to develop policy prescriptions. Implicitly, the “economic freedom” literature suggests that countries embrace an “Anglo-Swiss” policy model, although the rich world offers alternative models that maximize good governance but not liberalization. Factor analyses suggest that the index’s Legal System & Property Rights component is more closely related to outside governance metrics that do not imply market liberalism than other “economic freedom” constituent measures