ABSTRACT
Since their founding, the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), and International Monetary Fund have undergone a series of important changes with respect to the intensity of their intervention in the economies of Latin America, as well as the extensiveness of their reach into extraeconomic policy areas such as administrative reform and governance (e.g., the control of corruption and crime). Throughout their existence they have sought to be organizations with a distinctive development mission (especially the World Bank and IDB) as well as lending institutions in the conventional sense. But at times, emphasis has been placed on one role over the other. In their ideal self-conception, the influence they yield on borrowers stems not only from the money they disburse but also the knowledge and ideas they disseminate. Attempting to maintain the dual status of development organization/bank has not been an easy road to follow. It has generated internal tensions as well as external criticism. Acting in accordance with the strict economic calculations of banks has subjected international financial institutions (IFIs) to charges of insensitivity by developing countries and exhortations to broaden their concerns by First World nongovernment organizations (NGOs). But playing an expanded role in development carries risks of its own. For one, it often entails entry into sensitive political and social terrain, generating further criticism among Third World borrowers. How IFIs have responded to increasing public scrutiny has had important implications for issues ranging from the kinds of projects and programs they have pursued to the kinds of personnel they have hired to design and implement them.
