«Washington Consensus» – Financial Model of Market Reforms in Kazakhstan
55 67
Keywords:
relief program, liberalization, privatization, monetary restriction, selective social protection, effective owner, feature of any cultureAbstract
Main setups and principles of the relief program for developing countries (countries of Southeast Europe, Latin America and CIS) called «Washington consensus» are given. The process of transition engineering in the countries in transition is described. Realization of several plights of Washington consensus in Kazakhstan and countries of Southeast Europe in view of national peculiarities, conditions and specifics of its economy are considered. Constructive criticism of Washington consensus and concrete suggestions on further improvement of economic policy of Kazakhstan are given in the article.References
1. 1.Stojanović, B., Kostić, Z. The Economic Aspects of Globalization and Transition //International Scientific Conference
«Globalisation Challenges and Social-Economic environment of the EU». ed. Storc J., School of Business and Management. – Novo Mesto, Slovenija, 20015.– Pp.508-518.
2. 2. Williamson, O., Winter, S. The Nature of the firm – origins, evolution and development, Oxford University Press, Oxford,1993.
3. 3.Fischer S. Applied Economics in Action: IMF Programs // American Economic Review, 1997. –Vol.87. – N2. – P.23-27
4. 4. Williamson J. Latin American Adjustment: Now Much Has Happened? Washington, Institute for International Economics,1990
5. 5.Standing G. Brave New Words? A Critique of Stiglitz’s World Bank Rethink // Development and Change, 2000. –Vol. 31.–P.754.
6. 6. Edwards S. Policy of economic stabilization and liberalization in transition period: Latin America’s lessons for Eastern Europe // Becoming marker economy in Eastern European countries. M.: Fund «For economic literacy», 1997 (rus)
7. 7. Hayek, F.A. The Constitution of Liberty, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1960.
8. 8. Williamson, J. What Should the World Bank Think About the Washington Consensus? // World Bank Research Observer.
Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 2000.– Vol. 15. – No. 2. – Pp. 251-264.
9. 9. Deepak L. Is the Washington Consensus Dead?// Cato Journal. –Vol. 32. – No. 3.
10. 10. Lopes, C. Economic Growth and Inequality: The New Post-Washington Consensus // RCCS Annual Review. – 4.
11. 11. Edwards S. Trade Liberalization Reforms and the World Bank // AER, 1997. – Vol. 87.– N2. – P. 43-48.
12. 12. Zecchini S. The Role of International Financial Institutions in the Transition Process / Transition to the Market Economy.
– Vol. III. (Ed. by Hare and Davis) L. – N.Y., Routledge, 1997. – P. 250-251.
13. 13. From plan to market: World Development Report. – 1996. World Bank, 1996; State in changing world: World Development
Report. – 1997. World Bank, 1997; Transition period: analysis and first decade lessons for countries of Eastern Europe and former
Soviet Union. World Bank, 2002. Last document was published already after J. Stiglitz left the World Bank. (rus)
«Globalisation Challenges and Social-Economic environment of the EU». ed. Storc J., School of Business and Management. – Novo Mesto, Slovenija, 20015.– Pp.508-518.
2. 2. Williamson, O., Winter, S. The Nature of the firm – origins, evolution and development, Oxford University Press, Oxford,1993.
3. 3.Fischer S. Applied Economics in Action: IMF Programs // American Economic Review, 1997. –Vol.87. – N2. – P.23-27
4. 4. Williamson J. Latin American Adjustment: Now Much Has Happened? Washington, Institute for International Economics,1990
5. 5.Standing G. Brave New Words? A Critique of Stiglitz’s World Bank Rethink // Development and Change, 2000. –Vol. 31.–P.754.
6. 6. Edwards S. Policy of economic stabilization and liberalization in transition period: Latin America’s lessons for Eastern Europe // Becoming marker economy in Eastern European countries. M.: Fund «For economic literacy», 1997 (rus)
7. 7. Hayek, F.A. The Constitution of Liberty, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1960.
8. 8. Williamson, J. What Should the World Bank Think About the Washington Consensus? // World Bank Research Observer.
Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 2000.– Vol. 15. – No. 2. – Pp. 251-264.
9. 9. Deepak L. Is the Washington Consensus Dead?// Cato Journal. –Vol. 32. – No. 3.
10. 10. Lopes, C. Economic Growth and Inequality: The New Post-Washington Consensus // RCCS Annual Review. – 4.
11. 11. Edwards S. Trade Liberalization Reforms and the World Bank // AER, 1997. – Vol. 87.– N2. – P. 43-48.
12. 12. Zecchini S. The Role of International Financial Institutions in the Transition Process / Transition to the Market Economy.
– Vol. III. (Ed. by Hare and Davis) L. – N.Y., Routledge, 1997. – P. 250-251.
13. 13. From plan to market: World Development Report. – 1996. World Bank, 1996; State in changing world: World Development
Report. – 1997. World Bank, 1997; Transition period: analysis and first decade lessons for countries of Eastern Europe and former
Soviet Union. World Bank, 2002. Last document was published already after J. Stiglitz left the World Bank. (rus)
Downloads
How to Cite
Kazbekov, B. K., Stojanović, B., Yermekbayeva, B., & Kazbekova, Z. (2016). «Washington Consensus» – Financial Model of Market Reforms in Kazakhstan. Farabi Journal of Social Sciences, 1(2). Retrieved from https://jhumansoc-sc.kaznu.kz/index.php/1-eurasian/article/view/5
Issue
Section
ECONOMICS
