Legitimacy Legitimacy is to discuss whether the IMF should be established from the value level and whether the organization and operation of the IMF reflect fairness and justice. The establishment of IMF is the result of people trying to erase the chaotic memories during the two world wars. It not only witnessed the joint efforts of the international community, but also showed the national interests and the ambition to plan the world governance order. Undeniably, over the past 60 years, the International Monetary Fund has played a great role in maintaining the international financial order and promoting the development of the world economy. However, people have different opinions on how to keep the IMF over 60 years old to prove its value. Friedman, Schultz and others made it clear that the IMF should be abolished on the grounds that its existence is an obvious example of political intervention in the market. Although few people agree with this extreme view, most people still realize that the IMF should make major adjustments, otherwise its legitimacy foundation will face the worry of disintegration. One of the most important aspects is that the IMF should show more international fairness and justice. The IMF has 185 member countries, and the rights of each country are directly linked to its share. However, the principle of share allocation and adjustment mechanism are not only unscientific, but also lack of dynamics, which leads to the fact that developed countries have greater decision-making power as a whole, especially the United States has a de facto veto power over major decisions, while many developing countries have less say in the decision-making process of the IMF. Even the fast-growing emerging powers can hardly show vitality and progress in the operation of the IMF.
Responsibility. The responsibility is to explore the operating mechanism of the IMF from the institutional level, including the function setting, supervision and response mechanism. Under the Bretton Woods system, the main role of the International Monetary Fund is to maintain exchange rate stability among member countries. When there is a "fundamental imbalance" in the balance of payments of member countries, it will negotiate with them to adjust the exchange rate parity and provide liquidity assistance. Under the Jamaican system, the main task of the IMF is to maintain the stability of the international financial system and assume the responsibility of "fire brigade" in the event of financial crisis in member countries; When international creditors negotiate with debtors, they act as "mediators". However, there are many problems worth discussing in the process of IMF performing its duties. For example, the IMF's problem vision should focus on national policies or systemic issues; How to strengthen the crisis early warning function of IMF in crisis management: whether the additional conditions of IMF loans are reasonable; Who should be responsible for the performance of the IMF, how to deal with it, and so on.
Among them, there are many disputes about loan conditions. Because some major countries dominate the decision-making process, the setting of loan conditions may be biased. South Korea's experience during the Asian financial crisis is an example. ChangHa-Joon, a British economist of Korean descent, satirized the IMF's loan conditions with a story in his "Hypocrisy of Rich Countries": "If I were a small business owner, I would borrow some money from the bank to expand my factory. It is natural for the bank manager to set some unilateral conditions on how I will pay back the money in the future; Even when expanding the factory, it is reasonable to set some conditions for what building materials and machinery to use for me. But if he attached a condition that I should reduce my fat intake, because (not completely unrelated) foods with high fat content would make me unhealthy and reduce my ability to repay the loan, then I would consider it unreasonable intrusion. Of course, if I really put all my eggs in one basket, I will bear the humiliation and agree to this unreasonable condition. But if he further stipulates that I stay at home for one hour less every day (thinking that wasting less time at home will increase the time available for work, thus reducing the chance of defaulting on loans), I may rush out of the bank. It's not that my diet and family life have no influence on my ability to run a business. According to the bank manager's reasoning, they are related. But the problem is that their correlation is indirect and limited. "
Effectiveness. Effectiveness is to discuss the governance structure of IMF from the tool level, including institutional setup, decision-making system and personnel arrangement. From the perspective of organizational structure, IMF is mainly composed of board of directors, IMFC, executive board, management and many professional service organizations. As the highest authority of the International Monetary Fund, the board of directors is composed of one director and one deputy director from 185 member countries. Usually, a meeting is held once a year at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and special meetings can be held when necessary. In addition to reserving the power to approve the increase of shares, allocate special drawing rights (SDR), amend the articles of association of the IMF, accept the forced withdrawal of new members and existing members, and amend the articles of association, the board of directors entrusts most of the power to the executive board. IMFC is composed of 24 directors from 24 constituencies of the Executive Board, and is responsible for providing decision-making advice to the Board on the management of the international monetary and financial system. Therefore, IMFC is only a policy consultation and decision-making forum. The Executive Board is responsible for the daily work of the IMF under the authorization of the Board of Directors, and consists of 24 directors, five of whom are appointed by the five member countries (the United States, Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom) with the largest share in the IMF. In addition, 65,438+09 executive directors are elected by constituencies composed of other member States (among them, China, Russian Federation and Saudi Arabia each elect one executive director to represent their own countries). In addition to weekly regular meetings and regular annual reports to the Board of Directors, the Executive Board often meets to discuss major economic development issues of member countries and major events in the international financial field. The management includes a president, a first vice president, two vice presidents and their staff. The managing director is not only the non-voting chairman of the executive board, but also the top leader of the IMF staff. Nominally, the managing director is elected by the executive board, but according to an informal practice when the IMF was founded, the managing director has always been a European, and since the establishment of the position of first vice president, the position has been held by an American.
Regarding the governance structure of the IMF, the main issues discussed by all parties are: whether ministerial committees should be established to strengthen the strategic decision-making function of the IMF, how to establish and strengthen the working contact mechanism between IMFC and the board of directors, how to reform the way of producing executive directors, and the selection of presidents and senior managers.