IMF Decision-making: The 2010 Reform is Not Enough

Abstract

After the ‘long and intense debate’ in the 14th review, the IMF issued amendments on Quota and Governance Reform as well as Board Reform, including doubling the Quotas, shifting shares, protecting the representativeness of poorest members, abolishing the five appointed-directive system in the Executive Board, and setting a second Alternate Executive Director. The IMF believes the reform is a success, while many scholars hold the opposite opinion. This essay will argue that, though the reform has been completed, the goals for building a more democratic, less-developed-country-involved decision-making system inside the Fund have not been achieved, since the power of ‘veto’ and the supranational power of ‘informal advisor groups’ still exist. Moreover, the reform lack actions to make non-state actors’ voices heard in the organisation as well as to change the white-dominating system of employees, which issues are both related to the decision-making in the IMF.