Neoliberal Globalization or "Global Disconnect"? International Financial Institutions, Western Creditors, Zambia and the History of Structural Adjustment Programs (ca. 1976-1991)

新自由主义全球化还是“全球脱节”？

• 批准号: 518558902
• 负责人: Privatdozent Dr. Jonas Kreienbaum
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Friedrich-Meinecke-Institut (FMI)
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/518558902?language=en
• 关键词: Neoliberal; Globalization; Global; Disconnect; International

The project examines the so-called structural adjustment programs that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund created from the late 1970s onward to counter rising debt in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The international financial institutions provided substantial loans, but conditioned their disbursement on economic policy reforms such as opening national markets to international trade and capital, privatizing state-owned enterprises, and reducing subsidies. Against this backdrop, the programs have been widely read, both contemporarily and in the social sciences, as “neocolonial” dictates and as instruments of “neoliberal globalization.” This is the point of origin for my planned project, which asks to what extent it makes sense to understand structural adjustment programs as instruments of (de)globalization. I start from the hypothesis that structural adjustment programs represent central “upheavals into the present,” triggering both globalization and deglobalization dynamics, for example when IMF-induced social spending cuts made the promises of global consumer culture visibly unattainable. Also, I understand them neither as exclusively “neocolonial” dictates nor as entirely voluntary reform programs. Using the example of Zambia, the project pursues a decidedly actor centered approach that aims to analyze the respective scope for action and to illuminate the entire spectrum of actors. In addition to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, this included the governments of central donor countries, especially the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as the debtor country. Furthermore, there were consultants, journalists and social movements in Zambia as well as in the Global North. Attempting to capture these different perspectives, I plan to draw on the archival holdings of the financial institutions as well as numerous archives in the three countries mentioned. The goal is a global history of Zambia’s experience with structural adjustment that takes a historically in-depth look at a specific case study in its historical context in order to do justice to the complexity and contradictoriness of the object of investigation. After the declassification of most archival material, the project can, first, provide a much more informed analysis of the negotiations, implementations, and perceptions of the programs under study than was possible for political scientists or economists of the 1980s and 1990s. Second, it goes beyond existing historiographical works, which usually focus on only one group of actors – officials from the international financial institutions, Western government officials, or intellectual godparents of the programs. Third, it thus contributes to the historical study of (de)globalization processes, to the genesis of the global economic order, and thus to the “prehistory of the present.”

该项目研究了世界银行和国际货币基金组织从20世纪70年代末开始制定的所谓结构调整计划，以应对非洲，亚洲和拉丁美洲不断上升的债务。国际金融机构提供了大量贷款，但以经济政策改革为条件，如向国际贸易和资本开放国内市场、国有企业私有化和减少补贴。在这种背景下，这些计划被广泛阅读，无论是在当代还是在社会科学中，作为“新殖民主义”的指令和“新自由主义全球化”的工具。这是我计划中的项目的出发点，它询问在多大程度上理解结构调整计划作为（去）全球化工具是有意义的。我从假设开始，结构调整计划代表了中央“剧变到现在”，触发全球化和去全球化的动态，例如，当国际货币基金组织引起的社会支出削减全球消费文化的承诺显然无法实现。而且，我既不把它们理解为纯粹的“新殖民主义”命令，也不理解为完全自愿的改革计划。以赞比亚为例，该项目采取了一种明确以行为者为中心的方法，旨在分析各自的行动范围，并说明所有行为者。除世界银行和国际货币基金组织外，这还包括主要捐助国政府，特别是美国和联邦共和国德国，以及债务国。此外，在赞比亚和全球北方都有顾问、记者和社会运动。为了把握这些不同的观点，我计划利用金融机构的档案以及上述三个国家的众多档案。目标是对赞比亚的结构调整经验进行全面的历史研究，从历史的角度深入研究其历史背景下的一个具体案例，以便公正地对待调查对象的复杂性和矛盾性。在大多数档案材料解密之后，该项目首先可以提供比20世纪80年代和90年代的政治学家或经济学家更有见地的分析，分析正在研究的项目的谈判、实施和看法。其次，它超越了现有的史学作品，这些作品通常只关注一组行为者--国际金融机构的官员、西方政府官员或这些项目的知识分子教父。第三，它有助于对全球化（去）过程的历史研究，有助于全球经济秩序的起源，从而有助于“现在的史前史”。