Publications /
Opinion

Back
Economic Development after the Washington Consensus
January 29, 2025

This Opinion was originally published in Project Syndicate

 

In today's global economy, developing countries must embrace a new policy framework that strengthens their macroeconomic resilience, harnesses technology for productivity growth, and fosters growth and structural transformation. None of this will be possible with an "every country for itself" mentality.

RABAT – The global economic landscape is changing rapidly, and developing countries are now facing three major constraints: the resurgence of protectionism, shrinking macroeconomic policy space, and profound technological disruption. With the neoliberal Washington Consensus – the dominant economic-policy framework for a half-century – no longer fit for purpose, a new paradigm is urgently needed to guide development in the years ahead.

In recent years, free trade, once a cornerstone of international cooperation, has given way to rising tariffs, large-scale industrial subsidies, and economic “decoupling.” The US-China trade war exemplifies this trend, with average tariff rates up sharply since 2018. Now that Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed “Tariff Man,” is back in the White House, a reversal is unlikely. And it is not just the United States: the European Union has also embraced tariffs, including on Chinese electric vehicles, citing unfair subsidies.

Moreover, countries have increasingly pursued industrial strategies as a means of bolstering strategic sectors. Of course, China, with its state-led economic model, has long relied on industrial policy, which is the basis of its Made in China 2025 plan, introduced in 2015. But even advanced economies – the leading proponents of the free-market orthodoxy of the past – are now embracing such interventions. The US CHIPS and Science Act, for example, includes $52.7 billion in funding for semiconductor development. And the EU has its own industrial strategy.

Such initiatives are designed to bolster economic security, but they also fuel geopolitical tensions and lead to value-chain fragmentation. For developing countries, this presents both challenges and opportunities. The growing alignment of trade with geopolitical dynamics – including the push for “friend-shoring” – might enable some countries to attract more foreign direct investment, but resource-dependent and least-developed countries face reduced demand for exports and heightened economic uncertainty.

Meanwhile, developing countries’ ability to mount fiscal- and monetary-policy responses is severely constrained. Successive crises – including the 2008 global economic crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and various commodity-price shocks – have eroded fiscal buffers. Demographic pressures, from young people in need of jobs to population aging, weigh on public budgets. Climate-change mitigation and adaptation also demand substantial investments. And some countries are redirecting funds to defense in response to rising geopolitical tensions. Large debt-service payments remain a major burden, compounded by high global interest rates.

Moreover, high global interest rates are forcing developing countries to raise their own interest rates to mitigate capital outflows and currency depreciation, with adverse effects on investment and economic growth. Making matters worse, central-bank independence in some countries has been eroded – a trend that undermines policymakers’ ability to control inflation and support economic stability.

All this is happening while rapid technological change is disrupting traditional growth models. Developing-economy growth has historically been driven by structural transformation – the reallocation of resources from low- to high-productivity sectors, such as from agriculture to manufacturing. In Africa, this dynamic accounted for 74% of productivity growth before 2008.

But as Dani Rodrik and Joseph E. Stiglitz have observed, structural transformation can no longer be achieved through export-oriented industrialization, not least because manufacturing has become more skill- and capital-intensive. Slower global growth, heavier debt burdens, deglobalization, and climate change (which is affecting traditional sectors such as agriculture) further undermine this approach.

The alternative strategy Rodrik and Stiglitz propose focuses on a comprehensive green transition and increased productivity in labor-intensive services. But while this approach holds promise, considerable public-sector capacity is required to support private-sector innovation and policy experimentation. A more comprehensive policy framework, capable of filling the vacuum left behind by the Washington Consensus, would start with three key priorities.

First, developing economies must bolster their macroeconomic resilience. To this end, they should strengthen fiscal frameworks, in order to build up more robust macroeconomic buffers; implement inflation-targeting regimes to promote price stability; and adopt more flexible exchange-rate regimes that can provide a “shock absorber” amid external volatility.

Second, countries should leverage technology to boost productivity, with a focus on the private sector. In addition to increasing the efficiency and transparency of government services, digital technologies can expand access to education, support innovation by facilitating research and development, and transform critical sectors, such as health care and agriculture.

Lastly, governments should continue to promote growth through structural transformation. While the services sector holds promise for job creation, it alone cannot absorb the millions of young people, particularly the unskilled and semi-skilled, entering the workforce in developing countries each year. Fortunately, some labor-intensive sub-sectors, such as agribusiness and garment production, remain viable sources of jobs and growth in low- and middle-income countries.

Green manufacturing and the pharmaceutical sector also offer promising pathways for industrialization. Special economic zones, strategic land use, and more dynamic startup ecosystems can stimulate industrial growth and job creation. Developing economies might also need to take steps to safeguard domestic industry from an influx of Chinese goods redirected from the US and the EU. Such measures should be transparent and time-bound, and comply with World Trade Organization rules.

None of this will be possible with the “every country for itself” mentality that seems to be taking hold worldwide. While the Washington Consensus had a decidedly mixed track record, it emphasized international engagement and cooperation. Countries must not throw out the baby with the bathwater. If developing countries are to build more resilient and inclusive economies in today’s global environment, they must embrace partnerships, share knowledge, and pursue collaboration among the government, the private sector, and international institutions.

RELATED CONTENT

  • October 29, 2025
    Dans ce podcast, notre Senior Fellow Francis Perrin souligne que l’Afrique reste très dépendante des énergies fossiles : malgré 20 % de la population mondiale, elle ne consomme que 3,5 % ...
  • Authors
    Nizar Messari
    October 27, 2025
    This paper analyzes the impact of the BRICS+ Summit of July 2025 on the evolution of the bloc, as well as on the relationship between the bloc and the U.S. under President Trump. It also tackles the aftermath of the summit and in particular the impact it had in the souring of Brazil-U.S. relations. Before the paper analyzes the impact of BRICS+ on Morocco, it goes over the consequences of the events that resulted from the summit on the Brazilian political sphere.  ...
  • Authors
    October 23, 2025
    The publication of the latest (74th) edition of the Statistical Review of World Energy (SRWE, 2025) is a good opportunity to take stock of some major trends in the world of energy. In this note, we focus on the African continent. All figures below are taken from this document and refer to the year 2024, unless otherwise indicated.SRWE figures relate to commercially-traded energies, which include fossil fuels, hydroelectricity, nuclear power and modern renewable energies other than h ...
  • October 23, 2025
    On 1 October, China marked the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic. Few nations in modern history have experienced such a remarkable transformation in so short a time. In just over seven decades, China has ascended from poverty and fragmentation to become a technological, economic, and diplomatic powerhouse of global significance. This trajectory—driven by strategic planning, institutional stability, and a steadfast belief in the state as a catalyst for develop ...
  • Authors
    October 22, 2025
    This blog was originaly published on orfonline.org. The maritime cities of the 21st century are not merely legacies of the industrial age. Rather, they are becoming platforms of global connectivity and engines of economic transformation. As global trade shifts toward digital platforms and multimodal logistics, the traditional harbour is transforming into a 'Blue City' - a modern coastal centre where trade finance, service industries, and skilled workers are considered as k ...
  • October 17, 2025
    Jodie Keane, Principal Research Fellow at the International Economic Development Group, discusses how green trade measures are transforming African economies, stressing the need for faire ...
  • October 15, 2025
    Depuis que l’économie a été reconnue par les Nobel, en1969, c’est à cette discipline qu’il revient de clore les cérémonies annuelles d’attribution des Prix aux lauréats. Pour cette année 2025, c’est le 13 octobre que  l’Américano-Israélien, Joel Mokyr, le Français, Philippe   Aghion, et le Canadien, Peter Howitt, ont été consacrés Prix Nobel de l’Économie. ...
  • October 10, 2025
    This episode of the Policy Center for the New South Podcast features Dr. Hung Q.Tran, Senior Fellow, discussing the tokenization of money and its impact on the global financial system. He ...
  • Authors
    Jorge Arbache
    October 9, 2025
    Conventional wisdom holds that the United States has undergone massive deindustrialization in recent decades, with the country's manufacturing sector supposedly withering as it lost ground to China. This narrative has fueled debates about industrial policy, economic nationalism, and the reshoring of manufacturing production. But what if this story is only partially true? What if, instead of disappearing, American industry simply changed its address?  ...