Das Suchergebnis hat sich seit Ihrer Suchanfrage verändert. Eventuell werden Dokumente in anderer Reihenfolge angezeigt.
  • Treffer 2 von 816
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Birds of a feather?

  • The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank ascribe to impartiality in their mandates. At the same time, scholarship indicates that their decisions are disproportionately influenced by powerful member states. Impartiality is seen as crucial in determining International Organizations' (IOs) effectiveness and legitimacy in the literature. However, we know little about whether key interlocutors in national governments perceive the International Financial Institutions as biased actors who do the bidding for powerful member states or as impartial executors of policy. In order to better understand these perceptions, we surveyed high-level civil servants who are chiefly responsible for four policy areas from more than 100 countries. We found substantial variations in impartiality perceptions. What explains these variations? By developing an argument of selective awareness, we extend rationalist and ideational perspectives on IO impartiality to explain domestic perceptions. Using novel survey data, we test whether staffingThe International Monetary Fund and the World Bank ascribe to impartiality in their mandates. At the same time, scholarship indicates that their decisions are disproportionately influenced by powerful member states. Impartiality is seen as crucial in determining International Organizations' (IOs) effectiveness and legitimacy in the literature. However, we know little about whether key interlocutors in national governments perceive the International Financial Institutions as biased actors who do the bidding for powerful member states or as impartial executors of policy. In order to better understand these perceptions, we surveyed high-level civil servants who are chiefly responsible for four policy areas from more than 100 countries. We found substantial variations in impartiality perceptions. What explains these variations? By developing an argument of selective awareness, we extend rationalist and ideational perspectives on IO impartiality to explain domestic perceptions. Using novel survey data, we test whether staffing underrepresentation, voting underrepresentation, alignment to the major shareholders and overlapping economic policy paradigms are associated with impartiality perceptions. We find substantial evidence that shared economic policy paradigms influence impartiality perceptions. The findings imply that by diversifying their ideational culture, IOs can increase the likelihood that domestic stakeholders view them as impartial.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Volltext Dateien herunterladen

  • 186.pdfeng
    (2193KB)

    SHA-512 13e3e5c577ab1d953ff4bd16f54466d148d556e28205c08c2e8cd86375d6f83f13aacfcf3469356f7cb9fc49ebbe9573b8398c801dcdc455189a702cc32802d1

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Mirko Noa HeinzelORCiDGND, Jonas RichterGND, Per-Olof BuschORCiDGND, Hauke FeilORCiDGND, Jana HeroldORCiDGND, Andrea Margit LieseORCiDGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-521690
DOI:https://doi.org/10.25932/publishup-52169
ISSN:1867-5808
Titel des übergeordneten Werks (Deutsch):Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe
Untertitel (Englisch):the determinants of impartiality perceptions of the IMF and the World Bank
Schriftenreihe (Bandnummer):Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe (186)
Publikationstyp:Postprint
Sprache:Englisch
Datum der Erstveröffentlichung:13.04.2020
Erscheinungsjahr:2020
Veröffentlichende Institution:Universität Potsdam
Datum der Freischaltung:30.04.2024
Freies Schlagwort / Tag:International Financial Institutions; International Monetary Fund; World Bank; bias; impartiality
Ausgabe:5
Seitenanzahl:27
Quelle:Review of International Political Economy, 28:5, 1249-1273, DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2020.1749711
Organisationseinheiten:Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Sozialwissenschaften / Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft
DDC-Klassifikation:3 Sozialwissenschaften / 32 Politikwissenschaft / 320 Politikwissenschaft
Peer Review:Referiert
Publikationsweg:Open Access / Green Open-Access
Lizenz (Deutsch):License LogoCC-BY-NC-ND - Namensnennung, nicht kommerziell, keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International
Externe Anmerkung:Bibliographieeintrag der Originalveröffentlichung/Quelle
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.