A review of Rodwan Abouharb and David Cingranelli (2007) Human Rights and Structural Adjustment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Abstract

This is a comprehensive, well-presented, carefully-researched study on human rights effects of structural adjustment programs (SAPs) conducted by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). The study stands out as one of the first large-N, systematic quantitative studies in book form that employs multivariate models to test an issue that has thus far been dominated by case studies. The issue of SAPs and human rights is not just academic, but it carries the most serious policy implications. In this age of global governance, vociferous anti-globalization groups are even calling for the abolishment of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs). This would be a valid enough proposal if the IFIs do more harm than good—the issue cannot be treated lightly, and it calls for the best available empirical evidence to inform policy (Milner 2005). Abouharb and Cingranelli, however, provide mixed results—SAPs increase violations of human rights, but they also increase the level of democracy in the long-run. How to evaluate these results depends of course on more intense scrutiny, but these results remind us to keep in mind the relative trade off between short-term pain and long-term gain. But what if the short-term pain, if it exists at all, is really small and fully worth it in the long-run? Liberal institutionalists believe that institutions, such as the IMF and World Bank, provide a global public good by promoting economic stability, economic monitoring and advice, and ‘low-cost’ finance for cash-strapped poor countries. Others argue that global economic stability comes at the expense of the poor, reflecting the nature of an unfair global economic system. The pessimists view SAPs as a systematic package of restructuring enforced on the poor states at a time of economic vulnerability. The SAPs apparently push neo-liberal policies on the signatories, forcing hapless governments to remove subsidies for the poor, cut government spending on services, devalue the currency, all of which impose hardship on the most vulnerable, often for the benefit of Wall Street and the rich elite. These poor