Is Neoliberalism Alive? Principles and the Washington Consensus

About the author:

Jerzy Kaźmierczyk, Ph. D., Postdoc, Institute of Finance and Economics, University of Tyumen; Assistant Professor, Poznan University of Economics and Business (Poland); e.kazmerchik@utmn.ru, jerzy.kazmierczyk@ue.poznan.pl

Abstract:

The following article presents the concept of neoliberalism and examines its popularity among researchers. This study referenceы the neoliberal socio-economic doctrine, reflected in the ten Washington Consensus principles.

First, the author presents and analyzes the neoliberal doctrine of economics. On this basis, he has formulated a survey, aimed at research economists. So far, there has been no such empirical research on the principles of the Washington Consensus. The survey responses have allowed to create a list of economic principles according to personal preferences.

The most popular principles include 1) freedom to invest funds; 2) protection of the private property; 3) independent central bank system; 4) the public debt not exceeding 60% of GDP; 5) the public finance deficit not higher than 3% of GDP; 6) moderately low taxes and social transfers; 7) economic development as the priority objective of the economic policy; 8) value added tax as the most important source of budgetary revenue; 9) employment growth as the priority objective of the economic policy.

Most of the chosen in the survey economic principles, on the one hand, are related to the Washington Consensus. On the other hand, they reflect the current economic problems and personal aspirations.

References:

1. Aggestam M., Falck H. 2013. “A Post-Washington Consensus Perspective”. Accessed on 12 May 2000. http://www.snee.org/filer/papers/19.pdf
2. Ananin О., Haitkulov R., Shestakov D. 2010. “Vashingtonskiy Konsensus: Peyzazh posle bitv” [The Washington Consensus: Landscape after the Battles]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [World Economy and International Relations], no 12, pp. 15-27.
3. Friedman M., Friedman R. 2006. Wolny wybór [Free to Choose]. Sosnowiec: Aspekt.
4. Foster R. 2017. “Social Character: Erich Fromm and the Ideological Glue of Neoliberalism”. Critical Horizons, February, vol. 18, no 1, pp. 1-18. 
5. Hartman A. 2017. “Culture Wars and the Humanities in the Age of Neoliberalism”. Raritan, Spring, vol. 36, no 4, pp. 128-140.
6. Harvey D. 2007. “A Brief History of Neoliberalism”. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. von Hayek F. A. 2004. Zgubna pycha rozumu. O błędach socjalizmu [The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism]. Cracow: Arcana.
8. von Hayek F. A. 2006. Konstytucja wolności [The Constitution of Liberty]. Warsaw: PWN. 
9. Hursh D. W., Henderson J. A. 2011. “Contesting Global Neoliberalism and Creating Alternative Futures”. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, vol. 32, no 2.
10. Kanbur R. 2013. “The Co-Evolution of the Washington Consensus and the Economic Development Discourse”. Macalester International, vol. 24, art. 8. Accessed on 10 May 2017. http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1230&context=macintl 
11. Kaźmierczyk J. 2011. “Grzechy ekonomii, czyli trzynaście problemów w rozważaniach ekonomistów (esej)” [Sins of Economic Thought: Thirteen Issues in the Economists Considerations (Essay)]. Zeszyty Naukowe. Ostrołęka: Ostrołęckie Towarzystwo Naukowe im. Adama Chętnika [Science Journal of Ostrołęka Scientific Society im. Adam Chetnik], vol. XXV.
12. Kołodko G. W. 2008. Wędrujący świat [The Wandering World]. Warsaw: Pruszyński i S-ka.
13. Kowalik T. 2005. Systemy gospodarcze, Efekty i defekty reform i zmian ustrojowych [Effects and Defects of the Reforms and Systemic Changes]. Warsaw: Fundacja Innowacja.
14. von Mises L. 2004. Liberalizm w tradycji klasycznej [Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition]. Cracow: Arcana.
15. von Mises L. 2005. Mentalność antykapitalistyczna [The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality]. Cracow: Arcana.
16. von Mises L.. 2006. Ekonomia i polityka, Wykład elementarny [Economics and Politics, Elementary Lecture]. Warsaw: Fijorr Publishing.
17. Morawski W. 2001. Socjologia ekonomiczna [The Economic Sociology]. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
18. Muralidhar S. H. 2016. “Myth of ‘TINA’: Neoliberalism’s Origins, Processes, Crises and Persistence in Contemporary World”. Journal of Management & Public Policy, December, vol. 8, no 1, pp. 21-26. 
19. Murray W. E., Overton J. D. 2011. “Neoliberalizm Is Dead, Long Long Live Neoliberalizm? Neostructuralism and the International Aid Regime of the 2000s”. Progress in Development Studies, vol. 11, no 4 (2011). Accessed on 1 April 2013. http://www.pentor.pl/48658.xml
20. Piątek D., Szarzec K. 2008. “Cechy państwa sprzyjające rozwojowi gospodarczemu” [Characteristics of the state conducive to economic development]. In: Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny [Legal, Economic and Sociological Movement], vol. 4.
21. Romashkina G. F., Didenko N. I., Skripnuk D. F. 2017. “Socioeconomic Modernization of Russia and Its Arctic Regions”. Studies on Russian Economic Development, vol. 28, no 1, pp. 22-30.
22. Sirohi R. A. 2017. “Alternate Paths to Economic Development: A Comparative Analysis of Brazil and India in the Era of Neoliberalism”. Brazilian Journal of Political Economy / Revista de Economia Política, April-June, vol. 37, no 2, pp. 304-323.
23. Simonova L., Pogodaeva T., Zhaparova D. 2015. “Up the Down Staircase or How to Improve a Rating”. Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 24, pp. 652-658.
24. Türk S. 2017. “Transformations of Affordable Housing Institutions under the Effects of Neoliberalism in Copenhagen”. Global Studies Journal, September, vol. 10, no 3, pp. 27-38.
25. van der Walt J. L. 2017. “Some Recent Responses to Neoliberalism and Its Views on Education”. Hervormde Teologiese Studies, vol. 73, no 3, pp. 1-8. 
26. Williamson J. 2004. “A Short History of the Washington Consensus”. Paper commissioned by Fundacion CIDOB for a conference “From the Washington Consensus towards a new Global Governance”. Barcelona. Accessed on May 2013. http://studentorgs.law.smu.edu/getattachment/International-Law-Review-Association/Resources/LBRA-Arc... 
27. Williamson J. 2003. “From Reform Agenda to Damaged Brand Name, A Short History of the Washington Consensus and Suggestions for What to Do Next”. Finance & Development.
28. Voronov V. V., Lavrinenko О. Ya., Stashane Ya. V. 2004. “Otsenka dynamiki mezhregionalnykh razlichiy (evropeyskiy opyt)” [Evaluation of the Dynamics of Interregional Differences (European Experience)]. Sociologiceskie isledovaniya [Sociological Research], no 1, pp. 29-39.