The views expressed in this article are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of EURODAD or Oxfam.
Pro-Poor Macroeconomic Policies Require Poverty and Social Impact Analysis
Version of Record online: 19 APR 2005
Development Policy Review
Special Issue: Analysing macro poverty linkages
Volume 23, Issue 3, pages 369–384, May 2005
How to Cite
Gomes, R. and Lawson, M. (2005), Pro-Poor Macroeconomic Policies Require Poverty and Social Impact Analysis. Development Policy Review, 23: 369–384. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7679.2005.00292.x
- Issue online: 19 APR 2005
- Version of Record online: 19 APR 2005
The IMF's PRGF is supposed to provide policy flexibility based on a PSIA of the targets it imposes. In practice, PRGF programmes have failed to incorporate this objective. Increasingly, this is leading to public embarrassment for the Fund such as that which followed revelations about limits on teacher recruitment and retention in Zambia and Honduras. This article argues that the IMF continues to use a rigid economic model that fails to recognise the existence of different macroeconomic policy options. Considerable work is going on outside the IMF on developing techniques for such analysis. Unless the IMF takes more concrete steps to ensure policy flexibility and adopt PSIAs, its commitment to poverty reduction will become rapidly discredited.