{"title":"多样性中的统一:选择国际货币基金组织总裁的全球共识——来自ggd在线调查的证据","authors":"D. Wheeler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1931019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On May 19, 2011, the Center for Global Development launched an online survey of the global development community on three issues: the selection process for the IMF’s managing director, criteria for rating the candidates, and actual ratings for 15 candidates who had been named by the international media. Between May 19 and June 23, CGD received 790 responses from people whose characteristics reflect the diversity of the international finance and development community. Survey participants represent 81 nations, all world regions, high-, middle-, and low-income countries, and all adult age groups. In this working paper, David Wheeler analyzes the survey results, incorporating the diversity of the respondents by dividing participants into four mutually exclusive assessment groups- Europeans, who have a particular interest in this context; non-European nationals of other high-income countries; and nationals of middle- and low-income countries. Although the participants are diverse, their responses indicate striking unity on all three survey issues. First, both European and non-European participants reject Europe’s traditional selection prerogative by large margins, with equally strong support for an open, transparent, competitive selection process. Second, participants exhibit uniformity in the relative importance they ascribe to CGD’s six criteria for selecting candidates. Third, the participants exhibit striking consistency in rating the fifteen candidates.","PeriodicalId":355227,"journal":{"name":"Development Economics eJournal","volume":"59 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unity in Diversity: A Global Consensus on Choosing the IMF’S Managing Director — Evidence from CGD's Online Survey\",\"authors\":\"D. Wheeler\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1931019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On May 19, 2011, the Center for Global Development launched an online survey of the global development community on three issues: the selection process for the IMF’s managing director, criteria for rating the candidates, and actual ratings for 15 candidates who had been named by the international media. Between May 19 and June 23, CGD received 790 responses from people whose characteristics reflect the diversity of the international finance and development community. Survey participants represent 81 nations, all world regions, high-, middle-, and low-income countries, and all adult age groups. In this working paper, David Wheeler analyzes the survey results, incorporating the diversity of the respondents by dividing participants into four mutually exclusive assessment groups- Europeans, who have a particular interest in this context; non-European nationals of other high-income countries; and nationals of middle- and low-income countries. Although the participants are diverse, their responses indicate striking unity on all three survey issues. First, both European and non-European participants reject Europe’s traditional selection prerogative by large margins, with equally strong support for an open, transparent, competitive selection process. Second, participants exhibit uniformity in the relative importance they ascribe to CGD’s six criteria for selecting candidates. Third, the participants exhibit striking consistency in rating the fifteen candidates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"59 1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1931019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1931019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Unity in Diversity: A Global Consensus on Choosing the IMF’S Managing Director — Evidence from CGD's Online Survey
On May 19, 2011, the Center for Global Development launched an online survey of the global development community on three issues: the selection process for the IMF’s managing director, criteria for rating the candidates, and actual ratings for 15 candidates who had been named by the international media. Between May 19 and June 23, CGD received 790 responses from people whose characteristics reflect the diversity of the international finance and development community. Survey participants represent 81 nations, all world regions, high-, middle-, and low-income countries, and all adult age groups. In this working paper, David Wheeler analyzes the survey results, incorporating the diversity of the respondents by dividing participants into four mutually exclusive assessment groups- Europeans, who have a particular interest in this context; non-European nationals of other high-income countries; and nationals of middle- and low-income countries. Although the participants are diverse, their responses indicate striking unity on all three survey issues. First, both European and non-European participants reject Europe’s traditional selection prerogative by large margins, with equally strong support for an open, transparent, competitive selection process. Second, participants exhibit uniformity in the relative importance they ascribe to CGD’s six criteria for selecting candidates. Third, the participants exhibit striking consistency in rating the fifteen candidates.