What ails the Bretton Woods institutions

The World Bank and IMF were rooted in the Washington Consensus, which foregrounded economics over politics. An ideological rethink and institutional makeover have become necessary

- NK Singh

I have attended nearly every International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank Annual Meeting since 1991, when they had an iconic place inthe economic calendar. Itwasa great congregation of policymakersand bankers trading ideas, technical insights, and getting enriched with the prevailing economic ethos. 2025 broke that tradition. The meeting came, and the meeting went.

This mirrorsa profound transition in the global multilateral development banklandscape. The US and the EU are divided by competing visions, while institutions such as the Asian Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, African Development Bank, and New Development Bankare gaining prominence. The lack of fanfare reflected a fragmented view on key issues: The development committee's spring agenda— Jobs: The Path to Prosperity— barely evolved into the annual meeting's Foundations for Growth and Jobs, leaving both institutions in a cautious wait-and-watch stance as the world racesahead.

The 52nd Meeting of the International Monetary and Financial Committee saw divergent ministerial statements. Yet members endorsed the October 2025 World Economic Outlook (WEO)’s assessment of the global economy. Global growth is now projected at 3.2% in 2025, compared with 3.3% in

2024. Inflation in advanced economies is projected to moderate to 2.5%, while emerging markets average 5.3%, underscoring uneven disinflation. Real interest rates remain above pre-pandemic levels in over 60% of advanced economies, showing monetary tightening’s lingering bite.