“Development” Has Failed Too Many People, So What Comes Next?

You know, Suma, that reminds me of...

Jim Wolfensohn, when he was president of the World Bank, and I was then Secretary General of Civicus World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

And one of the things we were doing was trying to open up more meaningful space for civil society to be able to engage with the World Bank.

And I got actually quite close to him.

People were a bit surprised because we had, of course, differences because I was always challenging the lack of democratic governments at the World Bank.

But he was quite, you know, he was quite an honest and open person.

And you know, I don't know if you remember what he did when he became the president of the World Bank.

He actually sent, he was making it like a rule that people had to go at least for six weeks or four weeks a year and work in the Global South, experience one.

So you were privileged that you started off there.

So you had the on-the-ground experience.

So let's get into it then, Suma.

So I mean, for many of our listeners, they will not have a real sense of what

it

means to be inside leading both the national development ministry and a major multilateral development bank.

And what does that teach you about the gap between policy language and real outcomes?

So in most of these organizations, and I'm sure we'll talk a bit more about this, power essentially resides with, if you like, the advanced economies who are providing most of the capital to these institutions.

And I think my experience in Botswana made it somewhat different for me in that although I'm a British citizen and I had an EBRD, I think one of the things that stood out for me was I was essentially championing the emerging markets who were borrowing from UBRD rather than representing, if you like, the G7 or the major shareholders of these institutions.

That was a plus point in many ways, but it also made my life quite difficult at times as well, and those of my management team.

So I think one of the things that I learned particularly about when I took into these jobs that what fundamentally determines the fortunes of poorer countries, essentially, and I'm thinking particularly as a political economist, if you like, is their leadership, their policy choices, and, of course, global conditions, you know, conflict, geopolitics, trade issues, and so on.

And what the multilateral or the bilateral development organizations are about and have to recognize is they can make a difference at the margin, but they're not fundamental players in this progress.

They need to be humble, therefore, and not over-claim in terms of how much they've done to make a country develop faster, slower, whatever.

Secondly, I think a big task leading these international organizations is You need to understand the policy choices that leaders of those countries are making.

And you need to, when you think those choices are good choices based on worldwide experience or what's working well, you need to back them as well and back those choices as well.

And you need to provide that long-term assured finance, which you can't get from the private sector very easily.

And you're around these multilateral or bilateral development organizations that provide that.