Gauged against despair of global recession just weeks before the G-20 gathering, the London summit appeared a spectacular, historically unifying and «full-figured» success in modern international finance. However, this paper strives to take a closer look at the backstage nature and true measurements of the announced reforms as well as beef-up funds earmarked in the G-20's London communiqué. Through the process of differentiating between finally achieved and -God-willing- yet to be arranged treatment of the global financial crisis, article exposes arguably remarkable superficiality of the IFIs' reform thus far, in both financial and essential sense. On the other hand, global(ised) economy, more than ever before, is crying out for globally coordinated management & regulation. Even though it became evident that policy measures which mitigated -what now seems as slowly dissipating- financial crisis and worldwide recession were at least 70 years old economics, having next to nothing worth reaping from recent financial crises literature or indeed (re)actions of multilateral financial guardians, still neither full recovery nor regaining control over globalisation could dawn without reform of international financial architecture. Hence, a fundamentally upgraded economic trigonometry among the IMF, (followed by the largely neglected) World Bank and BIS is put forward as a hopefully more able and further reaching proposal for policy oriented responsibility sharing. In concluding remarks, once again, an attempt has been made to depart from the normative analysis in order to sketch the likely outcomes for the crisis-struck global economy, with particular emphasis on critical lessons in retrospect as well as the couple of caveats ahead.
Marko Malović. "International Financial Crisis, G-20 And Global Policy Response." Montenegrin Journal of Economics. vol. 5, no. 10, 2009, p. 119-127
BibTeX entry download