The Reform Of The International Monetary Fund

Up to now,IMF has experienced several reforms;however,the reality that the voting power,the decision making procedure,and the governance dominated by the developed countries has not been changed.Because of the high institutional costs,the numbers of members and the diversified choices made by different members based on the different resources allocation on the issues,since the initial establishment,the international institution has been non-neutral,which brings different gains and powers to different members.The members in the established institution can be divided into two groups:the established group and the emerging group.The former has tried to keep its enduring advantages,while the latter has tired to realize its pursuits through the reform.By combing the main contents and results of the reforms of IMF since 2006,and on the basis of the premise that the members are limited rational,self interested,the main reason for the failure of the IMF to achieve substantive reform lies in the fact that the established group could gain advantages through winning the competition in the ideas and the rights to make rules or norms.The advantages could endure as long as the emerging group cannot defeat the established.In short,the substantive reform will not realize as long as the established has believed that the institution could bring it benefits,regardless of the legitimacy,effectiveness of the institution and the shocks from the epigenetic factors.