Performativity and the Politics of Equipping for Calculation: Constructing a Global Market for Microfinance

Abstract

This article argues that the concept of performativity deepens our understanding of contemporary, expertise‐driven processes of global economic governance. Tracing the World Bank's role in constructing a global market for microfinance, the paper suggests that the World Bank was instrumental in translating selected parts of economic models into practice, thereby changing microfinance practices globally. Socio‐technical networks centered on the World Bank were created to equip actors to become part of a global market, which incorporated not only donors but also commercial investors. The paper makes a critical intervention in the performativity literature by arguing for the need to take positional power and dominance in the socio‐technical networks of International Organizations more seriously. This move improves our ability to specify how economic ideas and models are translated into practice in transnational arenas.

Implementing Marketization in Public Healthcare Systems: Performing Reform in the English National Health Service

“…So far, performativity studies have mainly studied how academic theories and models are translated and embedded into calculative technologies, managerial and market devices, metrologies, incentive systems and so on. Henriksen (2013b) asks whether performativity applies just as well to a policy rather than a market setting, as the purpose of a model in both cases is to induce change in line with a model's representations and predictions. In the same vein, Hirschman and Berman (2014) note that whereas market devices have been studied extensively, there has been little interest in the devices that help policymakers represent and intervene in the world in economic ways.…”

“…The sparse literature on the policy performativity suggests similarities and differences between the two settings. Henriksen (2013b) suggests bureaucracies face different accountability criteria than markets, and new devices will often need to acquire legitimacy in a wider professional–scientific community before they migrate to policy settings. As is the case of economists involved in finance (MacKenzie, 2003) or market design (Mirowski and Nik‐Khah, 2007; Nik‐Kha and Mirowski, 2019), policymakers are often portrayed as pragmatists, combining ideas culled from a variety of sources rather being than wedded to specific models or theories, a process described as epistemological or policy bricolage (Campbell, 2005; Carstensen, 2011; Freeman, 2007; Stone, 2017).…”

The International Labour Organization and the ambivalent politics of financial inclusion in West Africa

“…The ILO has often been overlooked in relation to the role of the World Bank and the G20 with respect to promoting and governing financial inclusion (for example, Bateman 2012, Soederberg 2013, Henrikksen 2013, but it is not an 'outside' voice in the broader policy community dealing with microfinance and financial inclusion. The ILO does not dispose of the same resources as the World Bank, but is nonetheless a founding member of CGAP, the major international policy body on financial inclusion; has been engaged in microfinance projects 'on the ground' since the early 1990s (see ILO 1994) and draws on occasion on funding from the World Bank's International Finance Corporation (IFC).…”

“…The paper highlights the role of regulation in promoting the expansion of microinsurance. Parts of the paper hew very closely to the market-constituting logic of the World Bank's work on microcredit or G20 principles that would be issued a few years later (see Soederberg 2013, Henrikksen 2013. It suggests that regulatory frameworks for microinsurance need to balance 'how they can contribute towards developing and overseeing microinsurance activities while simultaneously continuing to promote safe and sound financial systems' (IAIS 2007: 38).…”

The future of international political economy: Introduction to the 20th anniversary issue of RIPE

“…Following this tradition we suggest that different kinds of problems can be tackled by a range of methods that themselves have a micro or macro focus. For example, we suggest that many emerging issues of inquiry may be best addressed with methods that have entered IPE scholarship more recently; for example, network analysis (Henriksen, 2014; or experimental methods that target micro-level behaviour with macro-level consequences (Findley, Nelson, and Sharman 2013). We also acknowledge that theories and methods are not one and the same, but that tackling empirical problems requires consideration and reflection on ontological, epistemological, theoretical, and methodological choices.…”