Influencing aid recipients: Marshall Plan lessons for contemporary aid donors

Esposito, Chiarella

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511759314.004

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this way, the Americans had the power to block or authorise releases from these accounts. 155 In the Netherlands, a Dutch firm could buy dollars that were made available under the framework of Marshall Aid. The guilders with which these were bought ended up in counterpart funds with which projects in the Netherlands could be carried out.…”

Section: The Role Of Marshall Aidmentioning

confidence: 99%

“A Chinese Wall along our Eastern Border” – Allied Occupation Policy in Germany and its Consequences for Dutch-German Trade Relations, 1945-1949

Lak

2018

Jahrbuch Für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the unconditional surrender of the Third Reich in May 1945, Germany no longer existed as a sovereign, independent nation. It was occupied by the four Allied powers: France, Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union. When it came to the postwar European recovery, the biggest obstacle was that the economy in Germany, the dominant continental economic power before the Second World War, was at an almost complete standstill. This not only had severe consequences for Germany itself, but also had strong economic repercussions for surrounding countries, especially the Netherlands. As Germany had been the former’s most important trading partner since the middle of the nineteenth century, it was clear that the Netherlands would be unable to recover economically without a healthy Germany. However, Allied policy, especially that of the British and the Americans, made this impossible for years. This article therefore focuses on the early postwar Dutch-German trade relations and the consequences of Allied policy. While much has been written about the occupation of Germany, far less attention has been paid to the results of this policy on neighbouring countries. Moreover, the main claim of this article is that it was not Marshall Aid which was responsible for the quick and remarkable Dutch economic growth as of 1949, but the opening of the German market for Dutch exports that same year.

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Marshall Aidmentioning

confidence: 99%

“A Chinese Wall along our Eastern Border” – Allied Occupation Policy in Germany and its Consequences for Dutch-German Trade Relations, 1945-1949

Lak

2018

Jahrbuch Für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Post‐1945 rural credit policy ‘best practice’ generally involved the provision of large volumes of credit at below‐market prices coupled with extensive TA support and a registered preference for supporting certain agricultural sectors over others. Given the ideological commitment to planning in most of the Left‐oriented postwar European countries (notably in the United Kingdom and France), the success of the Marshall Plan in countering the probably negative impacts of an IMF‐driven austerity plan for postwar Europe (see Esposito ), and not forgetting the undoubtedly successful planning exercise that took place in the Allied countries to actually fight and win the Second World War, such ideas seemed wholly appropriate at the time. In the United States in particular, where farming communities in the Midwest and elsewhere had been quite comprehensively devastated by the Great Depression, the extent of state‐coordinated financial interventions in rural communities is noteworthy since the early 1930s.…”

Section: ‘Neoliberalizing’ Rural Financementioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Microfinance in Contemporary Rural Development Finance Policy and Practice: Imposing Neoliberalism as ‘Best Practice’

Bateman

2012

Journal of Agrarian Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microcredit emerged in the 1970s as a mechanism whereby virtually all poor individuals could supposedly escape their poverty through self‐help and individual entrepreneurship. Crucially, neoliberal policy‐makers found the microcredit concept ideologically compelling, and the international development community soon began to provide massive support to establish and expand the microfinance movement. Today, however, even long‐standing microfinance advocates now reluctantly accept that microcredit has actually had no positive impact upon poverty or ‘bottom‐up’ rural development. In fact, those rural communities most exposed to microcredit have been severely damaged in a number of ways, especially through sub‐prime‐style ‘boom‐to‐bust’ episodes. Largely because of its supreme ideological usefulness, the microfinance movement nonetheless still retains some support in the major neoliberal‐oriented international development institutions, pro‐globalization think‐tanks, and in a number of Western governments.

show abstract

Publications on financial history 1995

Noiret

1997

Financial History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Influencing aid recipients: Marshall Plan lessons for contemporary aid donors

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

“A Chinese Wall along our Eastern Border” – Allied Occupation Policy in Germany and its Consequences for Dutch-German Trade Relations, 1945-1949

“A Chinese Wall along our Eastern Border” – Allied Occupation Policy in Germany and its Consequences for Dutch-German Trade Relations, 1945-1949

The Role of Microfinance in Contemporary Rural Development Finance Policy and Practice: Imposing Neoliberalism as ‘Best Practice’

Publications on financial history 1995

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About