Reform of the International Monetary Fund
Council Special Report from Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies
Council Special Report from Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies

Reform of the International Monetary Fund

May 2007 , 48 Pages

Council Special Report
Concise policy briefs that provide timely responses to developing crises or contributions to current policy dilemmas.

Overview

The International Monetary Fund’s purpose and scope of work have changed dramatically since its founding after World War II.

Peter B. Kenen
Peter B. Kenen

Adjunct Senior Fellow for International Economics

Whereas at first the Fund aimed to maintain monetary and exchange-rate stability among a mostly industrialized membership, today most members are developing countries, ranging from large, emerging markets to small, impoverished states. The Fund’s surveillance of macroeconomic issues has expanded to cover topics with little direct relevance to its mandate. Moreover, though no industrialized country has drawn on the Fund for more than twenty years, such countries still dominate the Fund’s decision-making.

More on:

International Organizations

United States

Development

These developments have sparked calls for reform. Proposals to modify the Fund’s activities, lending facilities, and governance have come from many experts, including the Fund’s managing director. Others, who find the Fund illegitimate or obsolete, have called for its abolition. This Council Special Report, written by Peter B. Kenen under the auspices of the Council’s Maurice R. Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies, rejects the urgings of the abolitionists and goes on to contend that efforts to reform the Fund deserve U.S. support. Many countries remain at risk for financial crises, and a strong Fund that can take the lead in responding is in the U.S. interest. With well-managed reform, the Fund could also play a useful role in resolving global economic imbalances. Overall, the report argues, the United States should not try to achieve unilaterally what the Fund can and should achieve multilaterally.

In making this case, Dr. Kenen offers a balanced assessment of the managing director’s reform proposals in both the Fund’s substantive areas of work and its governance—endorsing some, criticizing others, and urging a more aggressive role in confronting global imbalances. Reform of the International Monetary Fund demonstrates that with reasonable reform of its activities and structures, the Fund can remain relevant to the pressing global economic challenges we face.

More on:

International Organizations

United States

Development

Top Stories on CFR

Elections and Voting

Globally, more people than ever before voted in national elections in 2024. How did democracy fare?

Syria

China

Zoe Liu, the Maurice R. Greenberg Senior Fellow for China Studies at CFR, sits down with James M. Lindsay to discuss how Trump’s victory is being viewed in China and what his presidency will mean for the future of U.S.-China economic relations. This episode is the seventh in a special TPI series on the U.S. 2025 presidential transition and is supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.