Creating the Financial Stability Forum: What Role for Existing Institutions?

The Financial Stability Forum (FSF)—now rebranded as the Financial Stability Board (FSB)—has become a focal point for financial regulatory initiatives in the aftermath of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. Despite its central status, the body has received little attention from scholars. This is particularly striking both in light of the increasing centrality of the FSF/FSB within the realm of financial regulatory governance and the body's unusual structure and composition. Indeed, the creation and design of the FSF pose an empirical puzzle: what explains the creation of a new, informal and loosely structured institution and the centre of a financial regulatory governance regime? At the time of the Forum's creation, the broader financial architecture was marked by significant institutional density, with a large number of international organisations engaged in governance activities. This paper argues that it is precisely the structure and activities of these existing institutions, particularly the International Monetary Fund, the Bank for International Settlements and the Joint Forum on Financial Conglomerates, which account for the creation and design of the FSF, and points to the need for scholars to take seriously the role of organisations operating within institutionally dense spaces.     

The twin faces of public sector design

Design thinking has become a popular approach for governments around the world seeking to address complex governance challenges. It offers novel techniques and speaks to broader questions of who governs, how they govern, and the limits of rational instrumentalism in policy making. Juxtaposing design thinking with an older tradition of policy design, this article offers the first critical analysis of the application of design thinking to policy making. It argues that design thinking does not sufficiently account for the political and organizational contexts of policy work. Design thinking also errs in universally privileging one particular policy style over others, and fails to account for the reality of policy mixes. Despite these deficiencies, it is argued that design thinking can inform and enrich governance by helping policy designers produce more adaptable designs, better appreciate the behavioral dynamics of public sector design, and leverage networked approaches to social problem solving.     

Has Structural Economic Vulnerability Decreased in Least Developed Countries? Lessons Drawn from Retrospective Indices

The Economic Vulnerability Index (EVI) is a well-recognised measure of the structural vulnerability of developing countries and is regularly used and published by the United Nations for cross-country comparison purposes, primarily to review the list of Least Developed Countries (LDCs). However, due to the revisions in methodology occurring over time, the official EVI cannot be used to assess the changes in vulnerability. In this paper, we use two retrospective series of the EVI, based on constant definitions. The real change in vulnerability is thus isolated from the impact of revisions in the design of the index, allowing comparison of the evolution of LDCs and non-LDCs. The implications of the revisions in the EVI design are then discussed.     

Recycling and expansion: an analysis of the World Bank agenda (1989–2014)

This article analyses the agenda of the World Bank after the Washington Consensus, arguing that it became more encompassing, politicised and intrusive. This agenda expanded and recycled itself since, in addition to liberalisation, privatisation and macroeconomic adjustment, it also advocated the wide-ranging reconstruction of the economy, the relationship between society and nature, the state, civil society and visions of the world and social practices from a neoliberal perspective. It is argued that the fight against poverty was incorporated by the institution, which functioned as an auxiliary mechanism for this liberalisation. The importance of the incorporation of New Institutional Economics for this expansion and recycling is highlighted.     

The International Harmonization Process of Public Sector Accounting in Portugal: The Perspective of Different Stakeholders

This paper investigates the reform of public accounting in Portugal through the IPSAS adoption highlighting the perception of different stakeholders. Two competing theories (NPM and the institutional theory) are used to understand public accounting changes within the Portuguese context. In general, different stakeholders agree with the favorable moment and the context of the reform. The context of financial crises and the great external pressures to cut public deficits and to improve the quality of financial information seem to be the most important factors to stimulate changes in public accounting. In addition, stakeholders recommend the use of different strategies to ensure success.