Abstract

After almost 80 years of the IMF’s existence, the distribution of influence in key
decisions is still much as it was at the organization’s founding in 1945, during the era of
Western colonialism – still mostly in the hands of a small set of high-income nation. It is as
though the emerging “multipolarity” of the world order had not taken place. This essay sets
out the imbalance between the relative “weight” of a country (or set of countries) in the
world economy and the relative weight in Fund governance. After explaining the quota system and other determinants of influence (including occupancy of positions) and the history
of failed attempts to change the distribution of influence, the essay outlines several measures
of incremental reform which would not challenge the US, European, and Japanese grip on
institution but still improve the way it works in practice and also benefit the smaller and
poorer member countries in particular. However, without more radical shifts in the distribution
of influence, the answer to our title question is, probably not.

JEL Classification: F00; F02; F30; F33.