Rating: 
Summary: Insider's view
Review: It is not often that one can read an insiders view of the institutions that most of the protestors want to tear down. His review of IMF policy and approach to the Asian and Russian financial change is illuminating. He doesn't gloss over China's human rights abuses (but he doesn't highlight them very much either.) He provides an analysis of what went wrong, and suggestions for making the world a better place.His style is easy to read, and one doesn't get bogged down in massive footnotes or techincal economic jargon. But that said, he doesn't turn an inward eye at The World Bank. Or review any projects like the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh or other similar projects.
Rating:
Summary: Good but lacks Argentina's case
Review: This book is a good way to get into the inside of an organization that over the past years has failed to provide economic stability and a higher standard of living to various countries by implementing their economic policies. Although there's a lot of information about different cases such as Southeast Asia and Russia, it lacks the one and most important, Argentina. The policies carried by the IMF in Argentina made the country fall into their worst economic depression in its history, first supporting a Convertibility system with no fiscal discipline, then supporting a devaluation that made most of the people in the country fall into poverty. If you're interested in the Argentinian case, you should read "Argentina and the IMF" by Michael Mussa.
In general terms, the book written by Stiglitz focus on very important economic issues over the las 15 years and gets you inside the World Bank and IMF.
Rating:
Summary: Written as only an economist can
Review: There are many reviews on this book, so I'll try to keep this short: Good Points:
1) Insider's view of the IMF and world bank
2) Stiglitz has very personal views on policy and does not mince words
3) The book does not delve too deep into the economics of the issues so that the read becomes more like a textbook Weak Points:
1) Lack of an outline of the organizations and their key figures would have been a good introduction (although Stiglitz explains in the last chapter that he tried not to attack individuals). I personally would have liked to know more specifics of Stiglitz's role, as well as his relationships with Summers, Camdessus, et al.
2) more statistical analysis and proofs would have made the argument stronger
3) More on the world bank would have balanced the effort: the book seemed to slam the IMF without discussing the role of the other global institutions. However, the chapter of Russia makes the book worth reading alone. You'll get a good overview of the problems occured during the transition to the market structure. Like others suggested, I would try a book from another perspective after GLOBALIZATION & DiSCONTENTS. That's my plan.
Rating:
Summary: A hard to swallow pill
Review: "Globalization and its Discontents" is a very recently written book and many of the recent and sometimes terrible episodes of the recent world history (the terrorists attacks agaisnt the World Trade Center)is portrayed by the author in the context of a new World Order dominated by the lack of balance between the United States of America and the rest of the World.
The very creative title is in fact a play of words with Freud's book Civilization and its Discontents, and features the experience its author had as a key figure at the World Bank, after serving as the leading economics adviser to president Bill Clinton.
In the author's view the world economic order is governed by uninspiring and not sensitive money organizations, mainly the IMF and the Treasury of the United States of America , who lack almost all the important aspects of making it possible for a developed country, in due course, to attain economic and financial maturity vis-a-vis its developed competitors. The discontents are all the have-nots, countries and persons alike, that feel and showed pretty much intensely in the World Economic Forums of Seattle, Genoa and elsewhere, that something is very wrong in the present orchestration of the world order trough a very few powerfull financial and development institutions and that growth at last is to be obtained trough highs internal interest rates, massive unemployment and social disturbance in the poor countries, who lack all the necessary means to stand against the policies perpetrated by the developed countries. It is a vision almost everyone has in the Third World that the pills pescribed are very difficult to swallow. The only difference now is that this view is now shared by one important american economic scholar.
Rating:
Summary: Mixed Bag
Review: It takes some temerity to add yet another to 35 existing reviews of this book! But I do have a rather different reading of it. Previous reviewers seem to have thought that it was either the cat's meow or just a venomous attack. I am somewhere in between. The book makes a number of excellent, telling points against IMF and World Bank policies and assumptions. It does this in the context of what is, indeed, a full-scale attack--no punches pulled. Stiglitz' alternatives are not always the most viable or well-considered, either. So, three or four stars for good critique, but nothing for balance or for coherent solutions.
What worries me more is Stiglitz' lack of attention to a couple of notorious facts about the WB and IMF. He mentions them and then goes on to other things. First, these agencies have routinely supported the most unspeakably brutal and murderous dictatorships: Marcos in the Philippines, Mobutu in Zaire (now Congo), Rios Montt in Guatemala, the thugs of Sudan, the military junta in Indonesia, and on and on. They continued to do this for years after it became general knowledge that these regimes were using the loans, and other aid, to line their pockets and to buy weapons to suppress their own people--and then they ran down their countries' health and education systems to pay back the loans. This wasn't economic theory at work and it wasn't ignorance. We still need a serious study of this. The notorious lack of accountability, stressed by Stiglitz, has to be remedied.
Second, the World Bank in particular, and now the WTO also, have routinely gone up against the environment--though they know perfectly well that everyone, and especially the poor in the Third World, depends on the environment for survival. A highly-placed World Bank researcher (necessarily unnamed here!) told me some time ago that the World Bank's own studies show that all their big-dam projects cost more than they produce in benefits. The costs are born by the poor (especially those displaced by the reservoirs). The benefits largely go to the rich. The WTO's policies on "free" trade are notorious; they tolerate without protest the enormous subsidies that First World governments give their farmers (as pointed out by Stiglitz) but they won't bend a millimetre to protect forests, fish, and wildlife that are vital to the survival of Third World poor. We need a much better study and account of all this.
Whatever is going on in the non-transparent boardrooms of these agencies, the effect has been to keep the Third World in its classic position: an impoverished supplier of raw materials to the First World. The worst thing about the WB-IMF-WTO policy mix is that it routinely leads to the sacrifice not only of the environment but also of long-term investments like education. Without an educated workforce, the Third World is doomed to permanent poverty and backwardness. Everybody knows this, but the policies go on.
I wish Stiglitz, or someone, would take all this on.
Rating: 
Summary: Good critique of IMF and globaliztion
Review: Mr. Stiglitz has been critized by some for his comments, but his arguements based on his experiences match up with other sources. He discuses in details the problems with the IMF and offers solutions for improving the IMF. Those who blindly believe the the market can solve all problems should read this book. There is a balance between govenment and the markets and he effectively demonstrates the impacts of unsound economic policy. If only the IMF would listen
Rating:
Summary: Really, We Have No Other Choice
Review: Stiglitz offers a heartfelt but rigorous analysis of globalization, "the removal of barriers to free trade and the closer integration of national economies," asserting that it can and should be a force for good "and that it has the potential [in italics] to enrich everyone in the world, particularly the poor." However, given how globalization has been managed thus far, it must be rethought. Focusing primarily on the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank) during the past decade, Stiglitz responds to the basic question: "Why has globalization -- a force that has brought so much good -- become so controversial?" Here is an extended excerpt which, I think, will enable those who read this review to decide for themselves whether or not this book is as important as I presume to insist. "What we should ask of the international community is only this: the acceptance of their need, and right, to make their own choices, in ways which reflect their own political judgments about who, for instance, should bear the risks [of globalization]. They should be encouraged to adopt bankruptcy laws and regulatory structures adapted to their own situations, not to accept templates designed by and for the more developed countries. What are needed are policies for sustainable, equitable, and democratic growth. This is the reason for development. Development is not about helping a few people get rich or creating a handful of pointless of pointless protected industries that only benefit the country's elite;...Development is about transforming societies, improving the lives of the poor, enabling everyone to have a chance at success and access to health care and education....The developed world needs to do its part to reform the international institutions that seek govern globalization. We set up these institutions [e.g. the IMF and the World Bank] and we need to work to fix them. If we are to address the legitimate concerns of those who have expressed a discontent with globalization, if we are to make globalization world for the billions of people for whom it has not, if we are to make globalization with a human face succeed, then our voices must be raised. We cannot, we should not, stand idly by." Stiglitz's fervent hope is that the developed nations of the world will take full advantage of any and every opportunity to help the underdeveloped nations of the world to become full participants in a "new global economy in which growth is not only sustainable and less volatile but the fruits of this growth are equitably shared." Think about it: A world in which illness, hunger, and ignorance have (in effect) been eliminated by a collective effort by developed nations working closely and effectively with underdeveloped nations. Why not? Actually, as Stiglitz explains, there are several significant barriers to accomplishing that. The usual suspects, of course: territorial imperatives, corrupt heads-of-state and corporate executives, knuckle-dragging bureaucrats, etc. But there are also quite legitimate issues to be resolved which have little (if anything) to do with incompetence and corruption: Who owns what? By what laws, rules, and regulations will global collaborations be governed? How will initiatives be financed? By whom? To what extent? In his Preface, Stiglitz asserts "We are a global community, and like all communities have to follow rules so that we can live together. These rules must be -- and seem to be -- fair and just, must pay due attention to the poor as well as to the powerful, must reflect a basic sense of decency and social justice. In today's world, those rules have to be arrived at through democratic processes; the rules under which the governing bodies and authorities work must ensure that they will heed and respond to the desires and needs of all those affected by the policies and decisions made in distant places." Sound naive? Unrealistic? Perhaps even simple-minded? So be it. I wholly agree with Stiglitz. He has no illusions or delusions with regard to the seriousness of the problems to be solved...nor to the obstacles to those solutions. However, he passionately believes that if enough people of good will can work together, the problems can and will be solved. Count me in, Joseph Stiglitz. Where do I sign up? Those who share my high regard for this volume should also check out Warren Zimmermann's First Great Triumph in which he explains how John Hay, Alfred T. Mahan, Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge, and Theodore Roosevelt achieved for the United States "the first great triumph" of its global expansion or as Zimmermann describes it, "the birth of American imperialism." I also strongly recommend John McMillan's Reinventing the Bazaar in which he explains that any successful economy "has an array of devices and procedures to enable markets to work smoothly. A workable platform has five elements: information flows smoothly; property rights are protected; people can be trusted to live up to their promises; side effects on third parties are curtailed; and competition is fostered." A careful reading of these two books will eliminate whatever doubt (if any) may remain with regard to the legitimacy and urgency of Stiglitz's own concerns about globalization if it continues to be conducted as it has been until now.
Rating: 
Summary: Noble Prize Economist on Personal Revenge Tour
Review: Joe Stiglitz, an eminent academic economist, was pulled into politcs by Bill Clinton, who made him his chief economic advisor. Stiglitz soon made himself unbearable at the White House, and hence Clinton disposed of him by getting him the job of the World Bank's Chief Economist. As a consequence, Stiglitz was at the Bank during the Asian crisis. When the crisis unfolded, Stiglitz wanted to play a role, be important. But neither did the US administration, under the impression of its earlier experiences with Stiglitz, want him to play a role, nor did the IMF, charged with the resoulution of the crisis, listen to him. This [angered] Stigltiz ..., and thus he engaged in an increasingly public and bitter personal campaign against the Fund. This book represents campaign's dreadful climax (btw, Stiglitz soon became untentable also at the World Bank, World Bank chief James Wolffensohn (a Clinton intimus) had little choice but sacking him. The book undertakes every effort to discredit the IMF. Fund economists are presented as sorry idots who impose policies without having no clue of nothing - because (basically) they did not read Stiglitz articles. However, Stiglitz own policy recomendations are more than strange: - during the Asian crisis, the IMF should have advocated a losening of monetary policies (this would have made it cheaper to get capital out of the country, and thus have worsended the crisis. Morever, it would have induced a desastrous inflationary devaluation spiral. In the one counry that DID losen monetary policy, Indonesia, exactly this hapened) - in Russia, the IMF should have established the rule of law before engaging in macroeconomic stabilization (well, the Fund is not god. Maybe Stiglitz should have tried himself) - in Ethiopia, the IMF should have lent the President money while the latter broke the Fund's loan conditions - for no other reason that Stigltiz liked the President after chatting with him for a few hours(in other parts of the book, Stigltiz accuses the Fund of giving too much money with too little controls to corrupt policial leaders) In the economics community, the Stiglitz book has long gotten the reception it deserves: contempt (see the reviews - to cite just a few - by the Economist, the Cato Institute, Rudiger Dornbusch, or Ken Rogoff). To the wider public, Stiglitz accusations gain currency nonetheless by the fact that he holds a Nobel prize in economics - but of course, there are 60 other Nobel prize economists, and none of them ever came out in Stigltiz support. There is no question that Stigltiz can think cleverly about economics, but in this book he puts this talent (and his reputation) in the service of his personal campaign, with the predicatlbe result. In summary: a hateful book of someone who's ego was deeply hurt and who can't get over it. Stiglitz employs all means at his disposal to ride his revenge tour: miselading representations of the facts, fishy economics that are presented like self-evident truisms, unfounded personal accusations (Stan Fisher, ex-deputy Mangaing Director of the IMF, is practically accused of corruption). Needless to say Stiglitz, by focusing on the supposed personal failures of Fund economists, never gets to the deeper points of the global financial architecture, notably whether the current global instituional set-up (which icoudes the World Bank and the IMF) is capable of managing financial crises or makes them more likely.
Someone who is after ammunition against the IMF no matter how will love this book. Someone interested in serious thoughts about how to improve the global economic and financial system should stay away.
Rating:
Summary: The best book I have ever read in my life.
Review: Easy to read. Well-written. Utterly complete. Well-researched. I don't know if you can win a Pulitzer for nonfiction, but Stiglitz would deserve one. Never has an economist woven in economic concepts so subtly and made them so easy to understand. Never has ANYONE made the IMF and the World Bank so easy to understand. And this combined in a book that puts almost every other nonfiction author in history to shame, for its clear and concise style. And did I mention that Stiglitz is open about his biases, and also suggests solutions for all of the problems he notes? And that he's realistic and practical? I'm bowled over. I'm giving this book to everyone I know. WOW.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Start
Review: "Globalization and its Discontents" is a great title for a book, and one can't blame Joseph Stiglitz for grabbing it. Unfortunately, the title is a bit misleading for the book he has actually written. If you're looking for an overview of the latest round of worldwide economic integration ("globalization"), or the protest movement that has arisen in its wake (the "discontents"), you won't really find it here. There's very little discussion of the fundamental issue surrounding globalization--the pros and cons of vastly expanded international trade. You won't find more than a few passing references to the World Trade Organization, for example, or to the 1999 WTO conference in Seattle that marked the birth of the anti-globalization movement. What Stiglitz does offer is a devastating critique of a different organization, the International Monetary Fund. "Write about what you know" is always good advice, and the author follows it here. As a former Clinton administration economic advisor and later an official at a rival organization, the World Bank, Stiglitz has a few scores to settle. He takes dead aim at the so-called "Washington Consensus"--the notion peddled by the IMF and U.S. Treasury in the 1990s that privatization, deregulation, open capital markets and balanced budgets would be a panacea for developing countries. The Nobel Prize he garnered in 2001 for his work on market failures lends Stiglitz additional credibility as he rips to shreds the IMF's blind faith in markets--particularly free-flowing capital markets. He argues convincingly that IMF policies made the 1990s financial crises in Asia and Russia worse. And he raises many worthy questions about whether certain constituencies (namely the financial services industry) have a stranglehold over international institutions that should be serving the common good. Most readers will emerge easily convinced that the IMF needs to be reformed and reoriented. What's missing from Stiglitz's book is any sense of whether that would be enough. One suspects there is a need for a much broader agenda to address the defects of globalization, and to assuage its discontents. But one will have to look for it elsewhere.
| 
