Renationalizing Finance For Development Policy Space and Public Economic Control in Bolivia (Naqvi 2021)

Review of International Political Economy
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rrip20
Renationalizing finance for development: policy

space and public economic control in Bolivia
Natalya Naqvi
To cite this article: Natalya Naqvi (2021) Renationalizing finance for development: policy
space and public economic control in Bolivia, Review of International Political Economy, 28:3,
447-478, DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2019.1696870
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1696870
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa View supplementary material

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
Published online: 17 Dec 2019. Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 5325 View related articles
View Crossmark data Citing articles: 12 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rrip20
REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY
2021, VOL. 28, NO. 3, 447–478
https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1696870
Renationalizing finance for development: policy

space and public economic control in Bolivia
Natalya Naqvi
International Relations, London School of Economics, London, UK
ABSTRACT
After years of placing faith in the markets, we are seeing a revival of interest in stat-
ist economic policy across the world, particularly with regards to finance. How
much policy space do previously liberalized developing countries still have to
renationalize their financial sectors by exerting direct control over the process of
credit allocation, despite the constraints posed by economic globalization? Under
what conditions do they actually use this policy space? Bolivia is an especially
important case because it is one of the few peripheral countries that implemented
strongly interventionist financial reform in the 2010s. Using Bolivia as a least likely
case, I argue that two factors, increased availability of external financing sources,
and domestic popular mobilization, create favorable conditions for developmentalist
financial reform because these make it possible to reduce external conditionalities
and overcome opposition by the domestic financial sector. Popular mobilizations
paved the way for reform by bringing developmentalist policymakers to power and
exerting pressure on them to 1. Maximize policy space by diversifying into newly
available alternative sources of foreign borrowing to reduce external conditional-
ities, and 2. Mitigate the importance of disinvestment threats by domestic economic
elites by incrementally increasing public ownership and control of the economy.
KEYWORDS
Globalization; policy space; business power; finance; development; industrial policy
Introduction: Renationalizing finance for development

Developmentalist or activist financial policies entailing state intervention to allocate
credit to strategic sectors, through tools such as interest rate controls, lending quotas,
or state-owned banks, were a critical component of industrial policy and political
control in postwar developmental states (Amsden, 1992).1 Since then, most develop-
ing countries have deregulated domestic finance, opened their capital accounts to
international financial flows, surrendering credit allocation decisions to private banks,
and by and large, moved away from statist models characterized by heavy public
ownership and government planning, often under Structural Adjustment Program
conditionalities of their external creditors, the IMF and World Bank.
CONTACT Natalya Naqvi n.naqvi@lse.ac.uk International Relations, London School of Economics,

London, UK.
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.
ß 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
448 N. NAQVI
In the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, the benefits of financial liberalization and
deregulation have come into question, and activist financial policies to direct credit
are once again being seen as vital to serving national industrial policy and climate
mitigation objectives (Griffith-Jones & Ocampo, 2018; Mazzucato & Penna, 2016).
Yet following over three decades of economic globalization it is not clear how
much policy space, defined as ‘the flexibility of international institutions to allow
sovereign states to deploy and coordinate desired policy outputs’ (Gallagher, 2015,
p. 7), developing countries still have to conduct such policies. Under what condi-
tions do previously liberalized developing countries renationalize2 their financial
sectors despite three main sets of constraints: the liberalization conditionalities of
external official and bilateral creditors’, the preferences of foreign private investors,
and the opposition of the domestic private financial sector, which may be con-
cerned such reforms will limit its profitability?
Using Bolivia, a highly liberalized peripheral country that nonetheless renation-
alized its financial sector in 2013, as a least likely case, I argue that two factors, the
increased availability of low-conditionality sources of external finance, and domes-
tic popular mobilization, create favorable conditions for even peripheral countries
to renationalize finance despite opposition by foreign creditors and domestic finan-
cial elites. While the supply of external financing options exogenously determines
how much potential a government has to increase policy space, the balance of
power between domestic financial elites, and countervailing popular sectors deter-
mines whether governments will actually increase their policy space, and also
whether they are able to overcome domestic opposition to reform. Policy space is
not purely exogenous, but also varies partly as a function of domestic political con-
ditions. This paper contributes to the literatures on policy space and business
power by offering a detailed causal explanation of how popular sectors can reduce
both the ‘instrumental’ or political and ‘structural’ or economic power of domestic
business, and increase external policy space.
Popular mobilization can bring developmentalist policymakers who represent
the interests of non-elite groups to power, reducing economic elites instrumental
power. Sustained mobilization then pressures policymakers to 1. Increase policy
space by diversifying into alternative external financing sources to reduce vulner-
ability to creditor conditionalities, and 2. Reduce the structural power of domestic
financial elites through a program of incremental reform that decreases the import-
ance of the private sector in the economy and reduces the credibility of disinvest-
ment threats. Mobilizations strengthen the hand of policymakers in enacting these
incremental reforms because policymakers are able to credibly threaten economic
elites with popular demands for even more radical reform.
Economic globalization and policy space

An extensive literature has debated the extent to which globalization has con-
strained developing countries ability to use key industrial policy tools in trade and
investment (see for example Shadlen, 2005; Wade, 2003). In the realm of finance,
the use of developmentalist financial policies is governed mainly by the condition-
alities of external creditors.3 Balance of payments constraints have historically
made late industrializing countries structurally dependent on external finance for
growth (Chenery & Strout, 1966), and therefore vulnerable to creditor
REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY 449
conditionalities. Constraints have intensified since economic globalization began in

the 1980s, increasing pressures for convergence towards the neoliberal model.
External constraints include market opening pressures from industrialized country
bilateral creditors looking to promote their own financial sectors, or to ensure
repayment of sovereign debt (Loriaux et al., 1997), or financial liberalization condi-
tionalities from the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs) who represent the interests
of these powerful states (Woods, 2006) and have increasingly become dominated
by neoliberal economists (Chwieroth, 2007). With financial globalization, develop-
ing countries also have to contend directly with the policy preferences of private
external financiers, including international financial markets and foreign direct
investors, who are can ‘discipline’ governments who deviate from market oriented
policies by withdrawing their investment (Campello, 2015; Mosley, 2003). The
increase in capital mobility associated with globalization is thought to have
increased the power of these foreign private investors, as well as domestic eco-
nomic elites which may be opposed to interventionist policies (Winters, 1994).
A weakness in this literature is that since it focuses primarily on constraints,
less attention has been paid to what factors can increase policy space. Nonetheless,
one important explanation focuses on how the availability of new, low-conditionality
sources of external financing enables developing countries to escape both the con-
ditionalities of BWIs and traditional OECD Development Assistance Committee
(DAC) lenders, as well as private market discipline. Cyclical abundance of capital
inflows during boom periods caused by high international commodity prices, or
highly liquid international financial markets, are seen to reduce governments’ need
to attract private foreign capital, or increase government spending power, and thus
widen governments’ room to reject neoliberal policies (Campello, 2015; Winters,
1994). Others point to the rise of bilateral lending by ‘nontraditional’ emerging
economic powers, most importantly China, as a structural shift which has funda-
mentally transformed the nature and availability of foreign credit. Because these
lenders eschew policy conditionalities they allow borrowers to increase policy
autonomy by reducing dependence on BWIs and DAC bilateral lenders (Bunte,
2019; Grabel, 2018).
However, an increase in the supply of low-conditionality external financing does
not automatically translate into increased policy space. Many countries including in
sub-Saharan Africa, and South and South East Asia, benefitted from the commod-
ity boom, excess financial market liquidity, and increased availability of BRICS
financing in the 2000s, but there is great variation in the extent to which they
implement developmentalist financial policies. A second weakness in this literature
is that it tends to treat policy space as determined exogenously to domestic factors
in developing countries.
Recent work (Bunte, 2019; Calvert, 2018) has highlighted the important role
that domestic factors can play in influencing policy space. Building on this, I argue
that in the realm of financial policy, the increased availability of low-conditionality
external financing options opens up only the potential to increase policy space.
This does not mean all governments will take advantage of these alternative financ-
ing sources to reduce the conditionalities they are subject to and increase the actual
policy space they have, i.e. the conditionalities they are subject to by external cred-
itors at a given moment. Many countries have the option of borrowing from
BRICS lenders, but prefer instead to take IMF or DAC loans in order to lock in
450 N. NAQVI
liberal reforms, or send positive market signals to foreign investors (Bunte, 2019).
Similarly, policymakers also have to take strategic action to capture a greater share
of commodity revenue, for example, through increasing royalties on, or outright
nationalization of, resource producing MNCs. Otherwise conditionality free foreign
exchange earned from the export of commodities will flow directly to the coffers of
MNCs where it can be repatriated to headquarters.
While potential policy space depends on the exogenously determined supply of
external finance, and is outside the borrowing governments’ control, within these
bounds, governments do have some room to manipulate their external environ-
ments in order to negotiate access to new sources of finance and increase their
actual policy space. Domestic factors are crucial in explaining why some govern-
ments maximize their actual policy space, while others do not. Domestic factors
also explain why some governments are able to use the policy space they do have
to implement their preferred policies against domestic opposition, while others fail
to overcome these domestic barriers despite having the requisite policy space from
external constraints.
Domestic explanations for policy space

Ideational accounts highlight the importance of key policymakers’ normative beliefs
in determining how they perceive the costs and benefits of violating international
agreements for developmental purposes (Calvert, 2018). In finance, a ‘neo-
developmentalist’ ideational consensus that finance should be subordinated to the
needs of the productive economy through centralized state control (Thurbon, 2016,
pp. 47–65), as opposed to policymakers who believe financial liberalization is eco-
nomically beneficial, should lead governments to diversify into conditionality free
financing sources where possible, so that they can implement the domestic policies
they favor. While policymakers’ ideologies are undoubtedly important, because
liberal policymakers would have little interest in interventionist policies, policy-
makers’ orientations are likely to reflect the interests of those who brought them to
power (Bunte, 2019; Calvert, 2018). We need to explain why developmentalist poli-
cymakers came into power in the first place, and why they were able to actually
implement their preferred policies against domestic or external opposition in some
periods, but not in others. Similarly, explanations that explain noncompliance with
international agreements through regime type or voter preferences (Rickard, 2010)
neglect that domestic economic elites effectively have a ‘second vote’ on the policy-
making process due to their control of the economy (Fairfield, 2015, pp. 17–20)
While electoral motives undoubtedly inform policymakers’ priorities, these do not
tell us why some policymakers are able to overcome domestic opposition to popu-
lar policies from economic elites, while others are not.
The financial liberalization literature points to domestic finance as a key interest
group pushing for financial liberalization and deregulation (Loriaux et al., 1997;
Pepinsky, 2013). Developmentalist financial policies are likely to face opposition
from the domestic private financial sector, if they limit its profitability, or increase
risk, while being championed by favored priority sectors (Haggard & Maxfield,
1993). The financial sector not only opposes diversification into BRICS external
financing but also prefers IMF loans because these lock in reforms it considers
beneficial (Bunte, 2019).
According to an extensive business politics literature, the ability of govern-

ments to impose their policies against business preferences depends on the
extent of the mutually reinforcing structural and instrumental power of business
elites vis-a-vis the state (Culpepper, 2015; Fairfield, 2015). In contrast to instru-
mental power which includes deliberate action to influence policy-making and
depends on factors such as personal relationships with/access to policymakers, and
degree of concentration and cohesion within sectors, which reduce collective action
problems in lobbying (Fairfield, 2015, p. 2), structural power results from the eco-
nomic position of a firm or sector. Owners of capital control the investment deci-
sions on which the economy depends for growth, and can destabilise the economy
through reducing investment or relocating capital abroad (Culpepper, 2015, p. 396;
Winters, 1994, p. 430). If policymakers anticipate that a reform will provoke
reduced investment or capital flight, they may rule it out for fear of harming
growth and employment, or disinvestment following reform may force policy-
makers to backtrack (Fairfield, 2015, p. 2). The private financial sector is generally
considered to have the most structural power due to its mobile nature (Winters,
1994), and because it has a high number of linkages to almost all other sectors of
the economy through its lending, which means that decisions to reduce lending
have both direct and indirect effects on economy-wide investment (Woll, 2014).
Popular mobilization, state action, and business power

Mass mobilization by non-elite groups4 is an overlooked factor in the structural
power literature, and can help account for variation in business power. According
to the literature, non-elite groups such as labor unions or social movements can
only act as a countervailing force against business instrumental power through pro-
viding attractive potential for electoral mobilization, lobbying by labor groups, or
strike action, but because they do not own capital, they cannot challenge business’
structural power (Culpepper, 2015; Fairfield, 2015). Yet the Bolivian case shows
that non-elite groups can be important in counteracting not only instrumental, but
also structural power. Countervailing popular sectors can reduce business power in
at least three ways: First, they can reduce instrumental power through promoting
electoral victory for developmentally oriented parties that represent nonelite
groups, which can sever instrumental ties between business and policymakers.
Electoral legitimacy also makes it harder for business associations to mount suc-
cessful public campaigns against government policies. Second, sustained mobiliza-
tion can pressure policymakers to weaken business structural power through a
program of incremental reform that decreases the importance of the private sector
in the economy and reduces the credibility of disinvestment threats. Finally, mobil-
ization strengthens the hand of policymakers in negotiations with business because
policymakers are able to threaten economic elites with popular demands for even
more radical reform, and because these threats are seen to be more credible when
they come from a government with electoral legitimacy.
Renationalization of finance in Bolivia

Against the vehement opposition of domestic private banks and BWIs, the left wing
Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) government of Bolivia not only re-established state-
452 N. NAQVI
owned banks, but also implemented the Financial Services Law (FSL 393) in 2013, con-
stituting a drastic reversal of decades of liberalization policies. The new law intervened
in credit allocation decisions of private banks through instituting lending quotas to a
list of ‘productive sectors’,5 and limited profitability by capping interest rates. This was
done without offering compensation, making it one of the most strongly interventionist
financial policies in comparative terms, short of bank nationalization.
Existing literature on globalization and state autonomy predicts that reversal of
liberalization reform is only possible for industrialized core economies that make
the rules of the international economic system (Naqvi, Henow, & Chang, 2018),
and to a lesser extent for large emerging markets that have the resources to assert
themselves in global financial governance (Woods, 2006). The Bolivian case is puz-
zling when compared to the handful of other previously liberalized developing
countries that have also seen a recent increase in financial activism, because these
are either key emerging markets like Brazil and Korea, or countries that are so iso-
lated from the international system like Ethiopia, that we would expect them to
face less constraints.6
Bolivia on the other hand is a least likely case for heterodox reform both in
terms of its domestic political economy and its position in the international econ-
omy. Like most developing countries, Bolivia followed a statist model during the
1960s and 1970s, until the 1980s debt crisis (Conaghan et al., 1992). Since then,
high external indebtedness and continued dependency on international financial
institutions for financing investment resulted in shock treatment more extreme
than in comparator countries. (Kohl & Farthing, 2009, p. 66). ‘Big-bang’ financial
liberalization, including liberalization of all interest rates in 1985, opening of the
capital account, and privatization and closure of state owned banks through the
1980s and 1990s, resulted in an open, highly dollarized, and predominantly pri-
vately owned financial system by the early 2000s (Morales, 2003). These reforms
empowered private finance by increasing its ownership and control over resource
allocation, and created strong vested interests in favor of maintaining the liberal-
ized status quo. This made reversal less likely in Bolivia than in countries that had
experienced less extreme liberalization.
On the international level, as a lower middle-income country with a small
internal market, Bolivia has a peripheral position in the international economy and
little bargaining power in the institutions of global governance. Bolivia entered the
2000s heavily externally indebted, with open capital accounts, WTO membership,
and a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with the US – a party to various institutions
of global economic governance, but with no voice in shaping their rules according
to its domestic priorities. Bolivia therefore provides an excellent case in which to
analyze the factors that enable previously liberalized peripheral countries to con-
duct heterodox economic policies that go against international norms.
Neither the increase in the supply of external finance, nor the presence of devel-
opmental ideology among policymakers can by themselves the pattern and timing
of developmentalist financial reform in Bolivia (Table 1). In period 1, increased
availability of low conditionality sources of external finance from the early 2000s
opened up potential policy space for Bolivian policymakers, but because private
business elites had strong instrumental and structural power over the government,
policymakers did not translate this into actual policy space by diversifying external
finance sources to reduce conditionality, nor were they interested in financial
Table 1. Three period within-case comparisons.

Time period
1. Pre Morales 2. Morales first 3. Morales second
Factors (2000–2005) term (2006–2009) term (2010–2014)
Alternative external Potential policy space. Potential policy space Actual policy space. End
financing source Commodity boom translated into actual of commodity cycle
since 2003, and BRICS policy space. approaching,
finance available, but Strategic continued
still reliant on diversification into diversification into
traditional external alternative bilateral alternative bilateral
financing sources and multilateral loans and private
financing sources, financial markets,
hydrocarbons reform high reserves
increases
commodity revenue.
Popular mobilization Yes, begins to Yes. Popular Sustained mobilisation
destabilize market mobilization leads to leads to stronger
oriented government electoral victory for electoral victory in
developmentalist second term
government
Structural power High due to High due to credible Low. Threat of capital
of finance development strategy threat of exit by bank flight by bank
that values high bank depositors. Gradually depositors reduced
profits, and due to decreasing as non- due to increased
credible threat of elites pressure financial stability as a
capital flight by policymakers to enact result of
bank depositors economic reform to dedollarization and
reduce reserve accumulation,
disinvestment threats increased public
ownership of the
economy, and
alliance with key
group of
economic elites
Instrumental power High due to market Much lower due to Very low as MAS gains
of finance oriented policymakers developmentalist control of the Senate
with close policymakers due to ongoing
connections to representing non-elite popular mobilization,
ASOBAN and BWIs groups in power. and real sector elites
in power partially mitigated by become divided over
lack of MAS control financial reform
over the Senate, and
cross-sectoral
elite cohesion
reform. In period 2, popular mobilization lead to the election of a developmentalist

government with ties to non-elite groups, reducing business instrumental power by
severing its ties with policymakers. However, policymakers were constrained from
undertaking radical financial reform at this stage due to fears of disinvestment and
capital flight. Business structural power remained strong due to continued private
ownership of productive assets. Under sustained pressure from its support base,
policymakers pursued a strategy of simultaneously 1. Increasing policy space by
negotiating access to new sources of BRICS financing and increasing royalties on
hydrocarbon MNCs and 2. Reducing the structural power of the private financial
sector by undertaking a program of incremental economic reform that reduced the
importance of disinvestment threats. This reduction of structural power caused
454 N. NAQVI
business elites to become sectorally divided, further reducing finance’s instrumental

power, and paving the way for reform in period 3.
Research design and methods

A three time period within-case comparison is employed in order to understand
how key variables (external financing, popular mobilization, and business power)
differ across time periods. The periods before Evo Morales election, his first term,
and his second term, provide a natural periodization according to key business
power independent variables. Within rather than cross-case analysis was chosen
because it permits intensive investigation of a particular outcome, and holds con-
stant a number of background conditions and factors that are not central to my
analytical framework including bureaucratic quality, regime type, and ethnic con-
flict. Process tracing was conducted in each of the time periods in order to estab-
lish how the change in independent variables prevented or led to the dependent
variable (financial reform). The conclusion extrapolates from the Bolivian case in
order to demonstrate the broader importance of the findings for other countries, as
well as other types of external financing and outlines avenues for future research.
The analysis draws heavily on 52 in-depth, semi structured interviews conducted
during fieldwork in La Paz and Santa Cruz between 06/03/17 and 26/03/17, and a
number of follow up conversations, in order to understand the preferences of each
actor, as well as their role in the negotiation process. Interviewees were involved
first hand in designing drafting, negotiating, implementing, or monitoring the FSL
393, and included high level policymakers and technocrats at government minis-
tries, central bankers, public bank managers, financial regulators, ratings agencies,
politicians from governing, and opposition parties, bureaucrats at the international
financial institutions, representatives from business associations from the private
sector, from finance, industry, agriculture, and commerce, and senior management
from large private banks large agribusiness firms. See Appendix 1 for a full list.
Interviews were triangulated with articles in local business newspapers, confidential
government and private sector negotiation documents given to the author by inter-
viewees, publicly available documents from the government, BWIs, and ratings
agencies, and quantitative data.
The negotiation of the FSL 393 and its effects

The Vice Ministry of Pensions and Financial Services at the Ministry of Economy
and Public Finance (henceforth Ministry of Finance) began drafting the new finan-
cial sector law in 2012. The private business associations ASOBAN (Association of
Private Banks of Bolivia), representing large commercial banks, ASOFIN
(Association of Entities Specialized in Microfinance), representing microfinance
banks, and CEPB (Private Business Confederation of Bolivia), the peak private sec-
tor business association, were called to the negotiating table at the Committee of
Planning, Economic Policy, and Finance of the Deputies (Interviews 1–5, Ministry
of Finance; 17, former ASOBAN). The FSL393 was debated and passed through the
Senate and the Chamber of Deputies in June 2013, and promulgated in August
2013 (La Razon, 2013).
The Ministry of Finance came out the clear winner in the negotiations. The pri-
vate banks were vehemently opposed to the FSL 393 and associated Supreme
Decrees, because these measures were expected to reduce the extraordinarily high
bank profits made between 2005and 2013 (Table 2), and reduced banks’ autonomy
of decision making over credit allocation. From the banking sector’s perspective:
‘You could say in a way the banking system in Bolivia has been nationalized. They
tell you where to lend to, at what rate. The private shareholders barely get anything
and they are angry’ (Interview 17, former ASOBAN).
Even though banks were given till 2018 to comply with their quotas, the FSL
393 had immediate and drastic effects on the distribution of credit and reduced
bank profitability (Figure 1). This shows that the FSL completely reversed of deca-
des of financial deregulation not only formally, but also substantively. Under what
conditions was such a transformative financial sector policy possible for the
MAS government?
Period 1. (2000–2006): commodity boom, strong business power, and

popular mobilization
During this period domestic business was both structurally and instrumentally
powerful, and despite an increase in popular mobilization resulting in electoral
gains for the left-wing developmentalist MAS party, a pro-market coalition contin-
ued to dominate the state apparatus. In this context, despite the commodity boom
increasing potential policy space, the government did not diversify its financing
sources, and developmentalist financial reform was not implemented despite calls
for intervention.
Although Bolivia entered the 2000s highly dependent on external creditors due
to continuous current account deficits (Figure 2) two developments on the inter-
national level presented it with the opportunity to pursue a more independent eco-
nomic policy. The commodities boom began in the early 2000s, resulting in the
first current account surplus in decades in 2003 (Figure 2). Beginning in 1998, the
HIPC campaign for Bolivia led to a significant debt cancellation by the IMF and
World Bank in 2005,7 which decreased both external debt stock and service
(Weisbrot & Sandoval, 2006).
Because domestic business elites continued to exercise a high degree of instru-
mental and structural power, policymakers did not take advantage. Bolivia
remained under an IMF Stand-By Arrangement (SBA), in which financial sector
conditionalities included privatization of the remainder of publicly held banking
assets, including the development bank Nacional Financiera Boliviana (NAFIBO)
and Banco Union, a commercial bank which had become insolvent and was
nationalised in the early 2000s (IMF, 2005a, p. 16; Interviews 27–30, Banco Union,
31, BDP).
Bolivia’s economy remained dominated by a small number of large domestic
private firms in agribusiness, industry, and finance, and foreign multinationals in
hydrocarbons (L opez, 2001). These sectors had significant structural power over
the government due to their important contribution to GDP and exports (Table 3).
The rest of the economy consisted of micro enterprises with little economic
importance or political voice (Lopez, 2001).
456 N. NAQVI
Table 2. Major financial sector reforms under MAS, 2006–2014 and their effect on banks.
Law/decree Date Main changes Effect on private banks
– 2006 Government decides not Banks fear ’unfair competition’ from state-owned
to privatize Banco commercial banks with government
Union, and to increase guarantees and subsidized funding sources,
its capital instead which enable to give loans at more
competitive rates than private
commercial banks
– 2006–2009 Subordination of Central Banks fear developmentalists will be able to
Bank and ASFI to MEPF impose their agenda more easily, without
intervention by an independent Central Bank
and regulator
Supreme 1/1/2007 Establishment of Banco de Does not initially pose a direct competitive
Decree Desarollo Productivo/ threat as it is a second tier development
28999 Productive bank (which lends to clients through
Development commercial banks rather than directly),
Bank (BDP) serving rural areas where private banks do
not operate. Private banks still fear that in
the future it will expand its lending
operations and conduct first tier lending,
becoming a direct competitor. These fears
have since materialized, with BDP lending
directly to an expanded client base since
2015, and planning future expansion in to
export financing
Law 211 23/12/11 Creates the Additional Tax increases are directly subtracted from bank
Rate to the Business profits, reducing the amount that could be
Profits Tax (AA-IUE), by paid out in dividends to shareholders
which banks that
exceed 13% ROE have
to pay an additional
tax of 12.5% (excluding
development banks)
Supreme 05/12/12 Establishes a tax on US Banks are opposed to tax, as it eats directly into
Decree dollar exchanges in their profits, but benefit from dedollarzsation,
1423 banks and exchange as their clients income is in Bolivianos, and
houses in order to default is more likely in the case of Boliviano
encourage de- depreciation vis-a-vis US dollars. Banks see
dollarization this as an attempt by the government solely
to earn more revenue, and attribute de-
dollarization to exchange rate policy
Financial 21/08/13 Establishes a Financial Expected to decrease bank profitability because:
Services Stability board which 1. Interest rate caps on lending directly limit the
Law 393 regulates: amount banks can charge borrowers and
1. Interest rates including deposit floors establish a minimum banks
lending caps and have to pay depositors, translating to higher
deposit floor funding costs, and lower lending charges
2. Productive sector 2. Productive sector lending quota force banks
quotas to lend to sectors that are less profitable in
3. Legalizes central bank the short term, while preventing them from
financing of SOEs lending to highly profitable but
4. Introduces a list of ‘unproductive’ sectors like consumer finance
nonconventional 3. Banks worry that this will cause inflation and
guarantees that ban erode the value of their assets
can be given as 4. Nonconventional guarantees increase banks’
collateral against a risk exposure, as it means accepting a wider
bank loan range of assets as collateral
5. Creates a guarantee 5. Directly eats into bank profits, as the assets
fund from 6% bank on the guarantee fund do not remain on
profits to be used bank balance sheets. Reduces the amount of
to support profit that can be paid out to shareholders
collateral guarantees
(continued)
Table 2. Continued.
Law/decree Date Main changes Effect on private banks
Supreme 18/12/13 Sets the minimum loan Banks prefer the interest rates to be set within
Decree portfolio levels for the FSL 393 itself, rather than as a Supreme
1842 loans to the productive Decree, because the former requires approval
sector, and establishes by both houses of parliament, while the
the maximum annual latter does not
interest rates for
housing credit
Supreme 7/9/2014 Sets the maximum annual Same as above
Decree interest rates for credit
2055 to the productive
sector, and minimum
deposit rates
Supreme 09/10/14 Creates Credit Guarantee Same as above
Decree Funds for the
2136 Productive Sector
Supreme 09/10/14 Creates Credit Guarantee Same as above
Decree Funds for
2137 Housing Sector
Law 771, of Modified law 211 to set Tax increases are directly subtracted from bank
December higher tax rate profits, reducing the amount that could be
29, 2015, paid out in dividends to shareholders.
Financial institutions (except for development
banks) with a return on equity index higher
than 6% must pay an additional income tax
of 25%.
Source. CEPB (2013); Gaceta Official de Bolivia; Various interviews.
65% 30%
Unproductive sector credit (LHS)
FSL 393
Productive sector credit (LHS)
60% ROE after tax (RHS) 25%
55%
20%
50%
15%
45%
10%
40%
35% 5%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Figure 1. Effects of the FSL 393 on credit distribution and bank profit (ROE).
Source. ASFI online database; World Development Indicators (WDI), World Bank.
The government was particularly reliant on traditional land owning agribusiness

elites, located in the most economically important department of Santa Cruz
department (Table 3). Santa Cruz business elites represented their interests to the
government through the well-organized regional association, FEPSC (Santa Cruz
Federation of Private Entrepreneurs), and sectoral associations CAINCO (Santa
Cruz Chamber of Industry and Commerce), CAO (Eastern Chamber of
Agriculture), and CADEX (Santa Cruz Chamber of Exporters) (Eaton, 2011;
Fairfield, 2015). The leading strata of this business class were organized into family
458 N. NAQVI
Current account as % GDP (LHS)

20 225
Total natural resource rents as % GDP (LHS)
Total reserves as % external debt (RHS)
175
15 External debt stock % GNI (RHS)
125
10
75
25
0
1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014 -25
-5
-75
Period 1 Period 2 Period 3

-10 -125
Figure 2. Bolivia’s external financing conditions and the commodity boom.

Source: WDI, World Bank.
Table 3. Bolivian economic structure.

Business Gross value Gross value
Business association added share in added share in Exports in Exports in
sector/region representation 2000 (%) 2013 (%) 2000 (%) 2013 (%)
Agriculture and FEPSC, CAO 20.4 18.1 38 14
agribusiness
Commerce CEPB, CNC 8.3 8.6 N/A N/A
(import/
export)
Manufacturing CEPB, CNI 7.5 7.3 30 15
industry
Hydrocarbons CEPB, CBH 6.2 11.8 14 54
Financial CEPB, 6 5.7 1 N/A
services ASOBAN,
ASOFIN
Mining CEPB, ANMM 3.9 8.3 17 16
and metals
Santa Cruz FEPSC, CAINCO, 30.01 28.11 41 37
department CAO, CADEX
% (GDP)
La Paz CEPB, FEPLP 25.69 24.96 14 8
department
(% GDP)
Average of CEPB, regional 6.32 6.7 6.5 8
other 7 business
departments associations
(% GDP)
Source: Instituto Nacional de Estadistica (INE). Note: Petroleum refining has been included with hydrocar-
bons rather than manufacturing and agro-processing with agriculture in order to better reflect the structure
of representation by business associations. Departmental export data is for 2007 and 2013.
Table 4. Market share and ownership of large Bolivian commercial banks.

Bank Share of deposits (%) Majority ownership Group’s Regional affiliation
Banco Mercantil Santa Cruz 17 Domestic business group La Paz
Banco Nacional de Bolivia 19 Domestic business group Sucre
Banco Bisa 13 Domestic business group Cochambamba
Banco Credito de Bolivia 16 Foreign owned Lima, Peru
Banco Union 7 State owned La Paz
Banco Ganadero 6 Domestic business group Santa Cruz
Banco Economico 6 Domestic business group Santa Cruz
Source: Bolsa Boliviana de Valores (BBV); Eju (2011), Orellana (2016); Interviews 17, 23, 24, 32-35, 36, 50.
Note: Deposit data is as of December 2005 (ASFI, 2005, p. 7).
owned economic groups (Orellana, 2016; Salmon, 2007, pp. 172–174), whose core
interests lay in agribusiness, but had diversified into banking and other commercial
activities after the late 1960s (Salmon, 2007, p. 167).
The liberalized, predominantly private, bank-based financial system was highly
concentrated, with the largest five commercial banks holding the most structural
power due to their domination of the financial system with over 70% of bank depos-
its (ASFI, 2005). One of the largest banks was foreign owned, and one state owned,
and the rest are partially owned by family economic groups from Santa Cruz, La Paz,
Sucre, and Cochabamba (Eju, 2011), implying a confluence of financial, agribusiness,
and other commercial interests (Table 4). In 2003, out of partially dollarized econo-
mies, Bolivia ranked second in the world (Morales, 2003, p. 9) with over 90% of
deposits and 97% of loans in US dollars (IMF, 2006, p. 29). The highly profitable
microfinance sector, which was growing rapidly during the early 2000s, had high for-
eign ownership, but was not economically important, making up only 7% of total
credit and deposits, and lending mainly to informal sector firms (IMF, 2006, p. 16).
Since 1985, despite divisions existing along both regional and sectoral lines,
business elites exercised strong instrumental power through pervasive ties to
Bolivia’s traditional parties, which dominated the state apparatus (Fairfield, 2015,
pp. 228–230), especially through the CEPB, which aggregated the interests of
regional and sectoral associations, and historically played a key role in national pol-
itics (Eaton, 2007, p. 88; Fairfield, 2015, p. 226). The banking association ASOBAN
was highly influential in the government, especially at the central bank and
Ministry of Finance, where it was regularly consulted on financial policy due to its
perceived technical expertise (Interviews 1–5, Ministry of Finance; Interview 21,
Former Central Bank; 17 Former ASOBAN). Key government positions were filled
by technocrats such as former CAF economist and World Bank consultant Luis
Carlos Jemio as the Minister of Finance, and orthodox economist Juan Antonio
Morales as the President of the central bank, who did not have direct links to, but
were held in high regard by the financial sector.
During this period, the financial system was criticized for a lack of long-term
real economy lending, especially to the industrial and affordable housing sectors,
and for medium and small sized agribusiness firms, and for profiting instead from
providing consumer finance at high interest rates, and fees based activities
(Interviews 1–5 Ministry of Finance, 13, ASFI). The non-financial private sector
lobbied in favor of reviving public banking, prompting the Ministry of Economic
Development to prepare a plan to recreate a state-owned development bank
(Morales, 2005; Interview 21, former Central Bank). However, as a result of the
financial sector’s structural and instrumental power, interventionist plans were not
460 N. NAQVI
implemented, and market based solutions favored instead (IMF, 2003, 2005). For
example, in a 2005 presentation, Juan Antonio Morales stated that the solution to
lack of real economy lending is not the re-establishment of state owned banks, but
to enforce better contracts through strengthening the rule of law (Morales, 2005).
Popular mobilization and the rise of MAS

From the late 1990s onwards, in the context of growing dissatisfaction with
Bolivia’s economic disparities, BWI conditionalities, and exclusionary social struc-
ture, popular mobilization increasingly acted as a countervailing force against busi-
ness elites’ instrumental power (Fairfield, 2015, p. 230). Although pro-business
governments remained in power during this period, popular protests against BWI
sponsored water and hydrocarbon privatization escalated into violence between
2000 and 2005 and led to repeated crisis and leadership changes. The challenge
came from a broad coalition of peasant, indigenous, and urban middle class voters,
which coalesced into a support base for the indigenous-left MAS party, led by Evo
Morales, which was the only popular party able to articulate mass grievances
(Molina, 2010).
Period 2 (2006–2009): increased policy space, weakened instrumental

power and strong structural power of finance
Popular mobilization brought the developmentalist MAS party to power in 2006,
reducing the instrumental power of business. Under pressure from its non-elite sup-
port base, the developmentalist government diversified into alternative forms of
external finance and increased hydrocarbon royalties to remove external constraints
to reform. However, the strong structural power of domestic business remained
unchanged from period 1, due to continued private ownership of productive assets,
and credible threats of capital flight and financial instability. This dissuaded policy-
makers from enacting drastic financial reform. Under sustained popular pressure, the
government began using the favorable external environment to increase the import-
ance of public investment, de-dollarize, and accumulate reserves, in order to reduce
business structural power by mitigating the importance of disinvestment threats.
Popular mobilization, electoral victory, and developmental policymakers

The massive popular mobilization finally resulted in the historic victory of the
MAS party in the December 2005 elections (Molina, 2010), and gave Morales the
political legitimacy to appoint developmentalist policymakers to key positions at
the most important economic ministries, including the Ministry of Finance, the
Central Bank, and the financial regulator, ASFI (Financial System Supervisory
Authority). Industrialization, and promotion of higher value added exports were
seen as vital to achieving sustained improvements in living standards for the MAS
support base. To this end, the new developmentalist ‘Economic-Social-
Communitarian-Productive’ model, with an active role for the state, was estab-
lished, in sharp contrast to the old ‘neoliberal model’ (Ministry of Development
and Planning, 2007, henceforth Ministry of Planning; (Ministry of Finance, 2015,
p. 11). Multinational hydrocarbons companies and new domestic industrial SOEs

were seen as the main agents of development, the former to generate foreign
exchange, and the latter to generate domestic employment and demand, with little
role for the domestic private sector (Ministry of Planning, 2007; Interviews 6–7,
Ministry of Finance; 12, Former Ministry of Productive Development and Plural
Economy, henceforth Ministry of Development).
In 2006 Morales appointed Luis Arce Catacora, former central banker under the
academic influence of the left-wing economist Carlos Villegas,8 as Minister of
Economy to show the MAS support base that the party was serious about eco-
nomic change. Key policymakers in the Ministry of Finance were of the view that
left to the market mechanism, credit would flow to profitable but unproductive sec-
tors, and that in order for the financial sector to perform its role in servicing the
productive sectors of the economy in the new model, strong state control would be
necessary (Interview 1–6 Ministry of Finance; Interview 8, Central Bank).
According to officials in the Ministry of Finance ‘Our vision was to guide the
financial sector through directing credit towards productive sectors unlike the old
law which was oriented towards the commercial and services sectors’ (Interview 1,
Ministry of Finance).
Strategic use of international financing

Unlike their predecessors, the MAS government seized the opportunity for greater
policy autonomy presented by the commodity boom and availability of funds from
nontraditional lenders in order to translate potential into actual policy space. BWI
conditionalities were widely blamed for declining living standards by MAS’s popu-
lar support base, and had triggered the protests of the early 2000s (Kohl &
Farthing, 2009). The MAS’s anti-IMF electoral campaign linked slow growth and
declining living standards to the lack of national economic sovereignty
(Movimiento al Socialismo [MAS], 2005a), necessitating urgent action on the gov-
ernment’s part once it came to power. Senior officials at the Ministry of Finance,
Planning, and Development ministries, and the Central Bank also believed that
removal of IMF and other external conditionalities was a perquisite to delivering
on important campaign promises, including improved working conditions, which
would require transitioning to a new development model (Interview 1, Ministry of
Finance; 10 Ministry of Planning; 12, Former Ministry of Development; 8, Central
Bank; Ministry of Planning, 2007, pp. 242–258).
The MAS government increased taxes on hydrocarbon MNCs9 in 2006 to enjoy
a vastly greater share of booming commodity rents than would have been the case
under previous taxation regimes. The government then used these resources stra-
tegically to abandon the standby agreement (SBA) with the IMF, releasing it from
the attached conditionalities (Interview 10, Ministry of Planning; 12, Former
Ministry of Development). The Ministry of Planning began a program of replacing
traditional financing sources, namely IMF and World Bank loans and bilateral
loans from DAC creditors, with finance that came with fewer conditionalities,
including loans from the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and Andean
Development Corporation (CAF) and bilateral loans from China, Venezuela
and Brazil (Interview 10–11, Ministry of Planning; 12, Ministry of Development;
Figure 3). Later, Bolivia further diversified into private external finance through
462 N. NAQVI
Figure 3. Public external debt owed to major creditors (% total).

Source: Banco Central, online database. Note: ‘Private’ debt refers to sovereign bond issues on international
financial markets.
issuing government debt on the international bond markets in 2012 and 2013
(Mitchell, 2013).
Instrumental power of business

Business’s instrumental power was greatly reduced after MAS won the election, as
elites found their institutional and personal connections to the incoming executive
and top policymakers severed (Wolff, 2016). This loss of instrumental power was
not absolute: MAS did not win control of the Senate in the legislative election,
which made passing controversial laws difficult, although not impossible.10
Furthermore, elites mounted a regionally and sectorally cohesive opposition. Santa
Cruz agribusiness elites escalated demands for regional autonomy, with the conflict
even escalating to the brink of civil war in 2008 (Eaton, 2007, 2011; Molina, 2010).
Financial elites, and the La Paz elite, although not directly part of the autonomist
movement, were allied with it due to hostility towards the government, especially
as a result of proposed wage and tax increases (Interview 14, CEPB).
Although lower on the agenda of the MAS support base than issues such as
wage and hydrocarbons policy, financial reform had become a salient issue, as high
interest rates in microfinance fuelled perceptions that the banks were exploitative.
This led MAS to pledge that it would establish a public development bank to pro-
vide subsidized credit to small and micro enterprises during its 2005 electoral cam-
paign (MAS, 2005b). Particularly important in fuelling anti-finance sentiment were
high rates on mortgage loans in the midst of a housing shortage in La Paz, where
an important middle-class section of MAS’s support base was located (Interviews
32–5, Ratings agency). This also led the Ministry of Finance to include construction
on the list of productive sectors, as it was hoped this would contribute to increas-
ing the supply of houses (Interviews 1 Ministry of Finance).
Once Arce was appointed to the Ministry of Finance, the contrast in instrumen-
tal power that ASOBAN enjoyed was marked in comparison to previous adminis-
trations. According to a former Central Bank employee:
When I was in the Central Bank in 2005 in the previous administration,
ASOBAN had a lot of power over our policies … For example, once we increased
reserve requirements for USD deposits in April 2005. ASOBAN disagreed and told
us this would be catastrophic. So we immediately made the terms more generous,
the increase more gradual. After Arce came to power everything changed, he
wouldn’t accept the attitude of ASOBAN (Interview 21, former Central Bank)
According to private bank representatives, Arce in was particularly hostile
towards the industry, ‘Arce doesn’t trust the industry … All conversations start
with the fact we are making too much money, that we are not fulfilling our social
function’ (Interview 25, Foreign commercial bank). The financial sector claimed
that the Arce administration targeted banks in order to increase political capital
among supporters ‘His [Arce’s] point of view is that the banking sector is a good
way to make political gains because were in a socialist state and doing things
against the rich people and private sector is politically good’ (Interview 23, Private
commercial bank). However, ASOBAN was constrained in their ability to lobby
publicly against Arce’s policies due to the popular support the MAS party enjoyed:
‘ASOBAN couldn’t do anything because Morales … won the [2005] election by
54%, which hasn’t happened since the 50 s. He came with strong political support
and that changed the dynamics for ASOBAN, who had supported the opposition
parties’ (Interview 21, former Central Bank).
Structural power of business

Despite MAS’s electoral victories, both financial and real sector business elites,
especially those located in Santa Cruz, continued to hold significant structural
power, as most of the economy remained under private control (Eaton, 2011;
Fairfield, 2015; Webber, 2008).
On the one hand, pressures from their support base, and new real-sector ori-
ented development strategy meant that policymakers no longer feared reduced
bank profitability, since finance was not considered a priority sector in and of itself
Furthermore, policymakers wanted to discourage lending to sectors they considered
unproductive in any case, so the consequences of disinvestment in these areas were
not seen to be that great (Interviews 1–5 Ministry of Finance).
On the other hand, although policymakers’ ideologies and perceptions were
clearly important to structural power, material conditions continued to constrain
them. Even though interviews with key architects of the FSL 393 at the Ministry of
Finance confirmed the financial reform had been on their agenda from day one,
the economic conditions that characterized the first years of MAS government
were such that policymakers feared passing a controversial financial reform would
cause capital flight by bank depositors, which in turn would cause bank runs, and
disrupt domestic economic activity, as well as put pressure on the currency.
According to a Ministry of Finance official: ‘Our first goal was to provide stability,
then after that we could do what we wanted … in 2006 the population11 was
scared that because we were a left government this would cause financial instability.
They were scared that what would happen in Argentina [in 2001] would happen …
464 N. NAQVI
But the idea was always to direct credit’ (Interview 1, Ministry of Finance).
According to a former ASOBAN representative, the day after Morales was elected
‘he visited officially the banking association – why? Because he was a populist can-
didate who just won the election and he didn’t want the banks to bleed in terms of
deposits. He said he realises the banks are important for the economy and we
aren’t going to do anything that will put in danger the deposits of the public’
(Interview 17, former ASOBAN).
Extremely high levels of dollarization compounded financial fragility for two
reasons. First, under dollarization, the central bank’s ability to act as lender of last
resort is constrained by extent of its dollar reserves (IMF, 1999). Second, capital
flight in the form of withdrawal of dollar deposits exerts pressure on the dollar
liquidity of the banking system and therefore on central bank reserves (IMF, 2003,
p. 19, 2005b, p. 16). Capital flight was also expected to put downward pressure on
the currency, which if devalued would result in an increase in the value of external
debt, which was denominated in hard currency (Interviews 1–4 Ministry of
Finance; 8, Central Bank).
Bolivia’s long history of struggling with business elites moving capital abroad in
response to domestic uncertainty (Conaghan, 1992, p. 7) made the Ministry of
Finance wary. Due to high-income inequality, large private companies or wealthy
individuals held almost 60% of total deposits in 1% of deposit accounts, mainly in
US dollars (IMF, 2005b, p. 16), (ASFI, 2005, p. 6). This made the Bolivian banking
system particularly vulnerable to bank runs caused by these large depositors mov-
ing their dollars abroad (IMF, 2005b, p. 16). The Ministry of Finance was also cog-
nizant that depositors were anxious about the security of their deposits under a
leftist government, as Bolivia’s previous leftist government had frozen dollar depos-
its and converted them to local currency in 1982, in response to high inflation
(Interviews 1–4 Ministry of Finance; 8, Central Bank). Repeated banking crisis
through the 1990s and early 2000s, including runs on bank deposits as recently as
2002 and 2004 (IMF, 2005b, p. 12), as well as Argentina’s recent experience with
the corralito in 200112 brought back these traumatic memories (Interview 8,
Central Bank; IMF, 2003, p. 15).
Foreign investors were a secondary concern for Ministry of Finance officials,
and played a role in moderating the reform agenda. While the government did not
wish to attract foreign investment into the financial sector, foreign direct investors
in other sectors, mainly in hydrocarbons, were important, and the government had
plans to diversify into private borrowing on international financial markets.
According to Ministry of Finance officials outright bank nationalization was not
considered as a serious policy option because of the negative spillover effects it
would have on foreign investors (Interview 1–5, Ministry of Finance; 17,
Former ASOBAN).
A number of policies were put in place by the government over this period that
gradually decreased the structural power of both financial and real sector business,
laying the foundations for passing the FSL in 2013. Commodity revenues were
channeled via the Central Bank into newly established SOEs, which took the lead
in designated strategic industries (Interviews 6-7 Ministry of Finance). This
decreased the structural power of the private sector because the government
became less reliant on them for investment (Figure 4; Ministry of Finance 2012).
Figure 4. Changes in the Bolivian productive structure under MAS.

Source: INE online database.
The Central Bank took advantage of the commodity boom to embark on a suc-
cessful program of de-dollarization to decrease financial fragility and regain control
of monetary policy, while the beginning of a period of high economic growth
boosted the health of the banking system by decreasing the risk of loan default
(Interview 8, Central Bank; WDI, World Bank). External debt to GDP ratios con-
tinued falling, and the central bank built up vast foreign exchange reserves, reduc-
ing the negative impact potential capital flight could have on the currency and
external debt (Figure 2; Interview 8, Central Bank). Frustrated by the private banks’
lack of real economy lending, the Ministry of Finance reversed the planned privati-
zations of the largely inactive remaining public banks, instead increasing their cap-
ital with funds from the treasury, and began using them to compensate for lack of
private finance (Interview 31, BDP; 27–30 Banco Union). In 2007, NAFIBO was
re-established as second tier development bank Banco Desarrollo Productivo (BDP),
and the commercial Banco Union took on a new role as the government’s ‘model
bank’, setting low interest rates and increasing lending to productive sectors
(Interviews 27–30, Banco Union).
Period 3 (2010–2014): Reduced structural power: From conflict to an

unstable coalition
The interventions undertaken in period two gradually created the material condi-
tions for the passing of the FSL 393 in period 3 through increasing actual policy
space and reducing the structural power of domestic real and financial elites. The
beginning of the period of high global liquidity in international financial markets
after 2009, due to quantitative easing and low interest rates in the US and other
advanced economies further increased the availability of low cost and conditionality
foreign capital to developing countries, and reinforced the boom in commodity
markets (Aky€ uz, 2017). Plentiful global liquidity, build-up of foreign exchange
reserves, reduction of external debt, and domestic de-dollarization mitigated the
466 N. NAQVI
threat of capital flight. After 2009, the political landscape also shifted significantly
in MAS’s favor, when the autonomist right became increasingly discredited after a
series of strategic mistakes, including an alleged assassination plot against Morales
(Reuters 2009). MAS won a landslide victory in the December 2009 election, with
Morales re-elected with over 60% of the vote, and a two-thirds majority in both
houses of the legislature (La Razon, 2016), leading to further declines in business
instrumental power.
This structural and instrumental weakness resulted in elite division, as it
prompted Santa Cruz elites to calculate that forming an alliance with the MAS gov-
ernment, and supporting financial reform was in their long-term interests. The
government was interested in reconciliation because it realized that when the com-
modity boom reached its end, it would once again need the agribusiness sector to
invest and generate foreign exchange (Interviews 12, Ministry of Development; 8,
Central Bank; 14, CEPB; 17, Former CEPB). This alliance reduced the remaining
instrumental power of finance, and further allayed policymakers’ fears of capital
flight, enabling the government to finally implement the FSL 393 in 2013, ten full
years since the start of the commodity boom.
External constraints
The IMF and World Bank were not consulted before the FSL 393 was passed
(Interview 45 World Bank; 46, IFC), and have been publicly and privately critical
(45 World Bank; 46 IFC; 20 ASOFIN). A 2015 IMF report on the FSL 393 warns
of the financial stability risks credit quotas and interest caps pose (Heng, 2015),
while the 2014 IMF article IV Consultation argues that the law will actually reduce
total lending, and recommends more market friendly measures to attain financial
inclusion goals (IMF, 2014). However, the Ministry of Finance, no longer being a
borrower, could afford to ignore this criticism: ‘from 2006 the opinions of IMF were
against everything we did, so we didn’t care about them … Even if they are right
we’re not going to listen to them’. (Interview 5, Ministry of Finance). According to
one former Ministry of Finance interviewee, an example of this was when the
Ministry of Finance noticed that the housing banks were unable to meet their social
housing lending quotas, and so considered lowering the quota. However, before they
did so, the IMF independently suggested the same thing. Because they did not want
their support base to see them as listening to the IMF, the Ministry of Finance
decided not to lower the quota (Interview 5, Ministry of Finance).
The private ratings agencies, Moody’s, Standard and Poor’s, Fitch, and Fitch’s
Bolivian subsidiary, AESA Ratings, had indicated they would react very negatively
to the FSL 393 (Interviews 32–35, Ratings Agency), and followed up by downgrad-
ing some individual banks, citing increased financial stability risks. However, this
was not a major consideration for the Ministry of Finance, since there was no for-
eign exchange shortage at the time due to the boom in international financial and
commodity markets, the government’s growth strategy did not rely on attracting
foreign or new private investment into the financial sector, and Bolivian banks no
longer funded themselves abroad13 (Interviews 1–5, Ministry of Finance; 9, Central
Bank). While banks were downgraded, Bolivia’s sovereign rating remained
unaffected. In late 2012, Bolivia even began issuing sovereign bonds on the inter-
national capital markets for the first time in almost a century, which allowed it to
tap in to yet another source of low-conditionality foreign capital (Figure 3).

Despite its heterodox policies, these issues were massively oversubscribed (Kilby,
2012) indicating that in the midst of a financial boom capital inflows were forth-
coming regardless of domestic policy. MNCs in other sectors came with finance
from their headquarters, or home country banks, and therefore had little stake in
the domestic Bolivian financial system and did not mount strong opposition to
financial reform (Interview 19, ASOBAN).
Business preferences and power

Real economy business elites. Policymakers succeeded in further reducing structural
power as the share of public investment continued outpacing private investment
(Figure 4), and due to the commodity boom, MNCs and state controlled hydrocar-
bons had far overtaken agribusiness as the main contributor to value added and
exports, putting Santa Cruz agribusiness elites in a relatively weak position
(Table 3). According to the CEPB, because private sector was seen as less import-
ant for investment and job creation, their input was not considered important for
making key economic decisions ‘They see us as very secondary. They think the pri-
mary engine of the economy is the state … if we invest … then they have to invite
us to the table for many key decisions, and they don’t’ (Interview 17 CEPB).
During the FSL negotiations ASOBAN and ASOFIN had launched a concerted
offensive to try to convince the rest of the private sector that it was in their inter-
ests to present a united front against the reforms, or intervention would spill over
into their sectors too. (Interview 17, Former ASOBAN). However, this strategy
was met by limited success, and ASOBAN felt that their negotiating position was
weakened because of this (Interview 18, ASOBAN). Although real economy elites
remained opposed to the MAS government due to wage and tax increases, they
began to perceive that the MAS government had the upper hand due to its eco-
nomic power and electoral legitimacy, especially its second term, and that accom-
modation might be a better long-term strategy. According to a representative of
CEPB ‘The private sector wasn’t able to put up against the FSL because the govern-
ment is so powerful because of how much they won in the elections … So you
cannot argue with them. It’s a very strong government for Bolivian standards.
They control all three branches, executive, two thirds of congress, and the judiciary.
And because of commodity boom they didn’t need the private sector’ (Interview
14, CEPB). As a result, real economy business elites either took no clear position
on the FSL, or supported it, undermining elite cohesiveness (Table 5).
In particular, the powerful Santa Cruz business associations, FEBBSC, CAO,
CAINCO, and CADEX, supported the FSL prior to its passing14 (Interviews 1-5
Ministry of Finance; 15, FEPSC). They calculated that in the longer run, given their
structural and instrumental weakness, they would be better off in an alliance with
the government, rather than with the financial sector, even though the FSL 393
had both costs and benefits for their businesses. On the one hand, since some
Santa Cruz family groups owned shares in the banks (Table 4), any reduction in
banking profits or increase in risk would impact them directly (Interviews 23
Private bank; 15 FEPSC). On the other hand, their core agribusiness was the main
beneficiary of the FSL, since these firms were among the least risky borrowers,
leaving banks scrambling to lend to them to fulfil their productive sector quotas
468 N. NAQVI
Table 5. Preferences of business associations with regards to the FSL 393.

Negotiating
Organization Representation position Rationale/arguments for position Current position
National/La Paz business associations
ASOBAN Large and Strongly Especially against interest rate Claim that there has
medium against caps, credit quotas, guarantee been a reclassification
private banks fund, and nonconventional of loans from
guarantees. Claim these will productive to
limit profitability and thus unproductive, and
hamper future lending people/businesses are
expansion and also increase misusing loans, and
risk, resulting in future NPLs. the large firms are
Following implementation of benefitting, and that
the law, the profits of large they have had to
banks did not decline as lower their risk
dramatically as expected, standards to make
although they fear this might their targets
be the case if the Central Bank
raises interest rates in
the future
ASOFIN SME and Strongly Claim the law disadvantages The situation was even
microfinance against microfinance banks more than worse for the
banks larger banks, because microfinance banks,
microfinance banks have no which had no
prior expertise in productive expertise in
sector lending, and their productive sector
business model relies on lending, and whose
charging very high business model relied
interest rates on making informal
sector loans at very
high interest rates
(Interviews, ASOFIN,
AESA ratings)
CEBP National Officially Publicly against the law because Against interest controls
association the against ASOBAN is influential in CEBP. and lending quotas
whole private Accepts there were serious
sector(including problems with lack of
banks) productive sector credit, but
opposes interest rate controls
and lending quotas. Believes
the main constraint to
productive sector development
comes from the real sector, not
the financial sector
CNI Large In favor In favor of quotas and Says the law has not
scale industry nonconventional guarantees worked because of
but not interest rate controls lack of
because its largest firms could implementation of
already borrow at low rates, nonconventional
and it saw these controls as guarantees. Thinks
giving too much discretion to finance is not the
the MEPF. Thought that high main problem
labor costs and taxes were the
main problem CNI businesses
faced rather than lack
of finance
CONAMYPE Productive sector Strongly Suggested even lower interest angry that most of the
small and in favor rates, and more extensive cheap credit has
micro-producers nonconventional guarantees in benefitted large firms,
its comments on the FSL draft, but continues
because lack of finance was an working with
important constraint on growth government on
(continued)
Table 5. Continued.
Negotiating
for its firms. Angry that most implementing
cheap credit has benefitted nonconventional
large firms, but continues guarantees
working with MEPF on the
implementation of non-
conventional guarantees which
will enable small and micro
producers to borrow
CNC Commerce, import/ Strongly Scared that since most CNC firms This did not materialize
export against were considered ‘unproductive’ yet, they have not
businesses credit would become more heard any complaints
expensive for them. Their fears from lack of credit
were assuaged after the law
was passed and this situation
did not materialize
Santa Cruz business associations
CAO Large and small Strongly In favor of the law because their Do not think the law
Santa Cruz in favor small and medium firms had goes far enough in
agriculture and serious financing problems, accepting rural land
agribusiness and their large firms also as a nonconventional
benefitted from lower interest guarantee? Complain
rates and longer maturities. that big agro
Initial demands included business has
allocation of 15% of banks benefitted but not
total portfolio specifically for small farmers
the agricultural sector, interest
rate caps of 6% for investment
capital and 8% for working
capital, the acceptance of
special forms of collateral,
including rural property,
flexible repayment terms, as
well as the creation of a
publicly funded Support Fund
to co-finance long-term loans
of up to 12 years. Don’t think
the law goes far enough in
accepting rural land as a
nonconventional guarantee
FEPSC Regional private Initially Initially reluctant because they Now in favor of the law
sector reluctant, thought it was excessively because it favors
association later in favor interventionist and ASOBAN agribusiness (which
representing had asked them for help, but makes up most of
Santa Cruz eventually they realized the their members)
law would favor most of their
members, especially
agribusinesses. Thinks the
interest rate controls and
lending quotas have worked,
forcing the banks to become
more efficient, but think the
taxes on banks should be
lowered, allowing them to
reinvest in their business,
rather than the government
spending the tax revenues
(continued)
470 N. NAQVI
Table 5. Continued.
Negotiating
CAINCO Santa Cruz Officially In their initial analysis of the FSL
industry, neutral 393 CAINCO criticized its
commerce ’ideological bias’, believing the
and tourism law to be too interventionist,
and the ‘productive’ and
‘unproductive’ sector
distinction to be arbitrary. They
helped ASOBAN to formulate
their negotiating position with
the MEPF. However, they also
realized their firms would
benefit from cheaper credit,
and decided not to intervene
in the public discussion unless
they felt financial stability was
being threatened. After
implementation, the FSL 393
improved member firms access
to credit, especially the
duration of loans
CADEX Large, formal Officially Believe the reform overregulates Neutral position. thinks
sector Santa neutral the financial sector and creates it hasn’t worked as
Cruz exporters market distortions, sending a well as it could
negative signal to foreign because of lack of
investors, but also that it does implementation of
not go far enough in nonconventional
improving access to credit for guarantees
small firms, due to lack of
implementation of non-
conventional guarantees. Large,
formal sector firms access to
credit has improved following
the reform, but CADEX believes
too much credit has gone to
construction, and not enough
to industry or agribusiness
Other players
SOEs In favor Were already receiving finance
directly from the central bank
before the FSL 393 legalized it,
so were not directly affected
by the other provisions of
the FSL
Hydrocarbons MNCs Neutral Finance themselves through
headquarters or home
country banks
Opposition Strongly Neoclassical economics, especially
parties against, but concerned with central bank
were financing of SOEs, out of
powerless to concern this would increase
stop the the public debt, and
government cause inflation
due to small
minority in
the
legislature
Source: Interviews.
(Interviews 19, ASOBAN; 23–25, Private banks; 16, CAO). Furthermore, supporting
the government in financial reform would bring concessions in areas more import-
ant to their core agricultural businesses, including a nonretroactivity clause exempt-
ing existing agricultural holdings from land reform, legalization of deforestation
and removal of limits on exports of foodstuffs (Interviews 15, FEPSC; 16, CAO;
22, CAINCO).
Structural power of finance. The Ministry of Finance’s initial FSL proposal had
included a higher 70:30 ratio of productive sector lending, lower productive sec-
tor interest rate caps, as well as caps for unproductive sector loans (Interviews
5, Ministry of Finance; 17, ASOBAN). During a negotiations between the
Ministry of Finance and ASOBAN, the banks claimed that reduction in their
profits would lead to a decline in credit in the medium to long-term, and harm
the poor the most. They also threatened to shut down their operations if the
FSL 393 was approved, and used the arguments from the 2014 and 2015 IMF
reports to support their claims (Interviews 19, ASOBAN; 23-25, Private banks;
32–35 Ratings agency).
The Ministry of Finance did not take these threats seriously because the danger
of capital flight by bank depositors no longer preoccupied Ministry officials
(Interview 5, former Ministry of Finance). Now that foreign exchange reserves were
plentiful, dollarization was at a historical low, and bank balance sheets were healthy
(Heng, 2015, p. 13), Ministry of Finance officials were reassured that the reform
would not cause mass capital flight. These fears were further allayed by the alliance
with key Santa Cruz business elites, which were among the largest depositors.
Although one of the major banks was foreign owned and threatened to leave
Bolivia in 2013, two factors prevented them. Firstly, it was difficult to find a buyer
given the recent FSL announcement, and secondly, due to the booming economy,
their venture in Bolivia was still relatively profitable compared to failed ventures in
Columbia, and limited operations in Chile and Panama (Interview 25, Foreign pri-
vate bank). The other most politically important universal banks were mainly
domestically owned, which meant that they had no easy exit option. Some microfi-
nance institutions were owned by foreign conglomerates, such as Banco los Andes,
which did sell their Bolivian operations following the FSL, these were not consid-
ered important to the functioning of the financial system by the Ministry of Finance
as they were lending mainly to informal, unproductive firms, at exploitative interest
rates, and so did not constitute a credible disinvestment threat (Interviews 1–5,
Ministry of Finance; 20, ASOFIN). Importantly, increased public ownership in
banking through the BDP and Banco Union meant that the government could com-
pensate declines in private lending, making its economic consequences less conse-
quential. Arce exploited demands for bank nationalization from mine workers,
cooperatives, and peasant farmers in order to frame the FSL 393 as a compromise
solution (Interview 1-5 Ministry of Finance; 14, former ASOBAN. Banks considered
nationalization a credible threat, due to the strong support the MAS government
enjoyed from its radical support base (Interview 25, Foreign commercial bank).
Some minor concessions were made to the banks so that profitability would not
become unsustainably low, as policymakers feared this could lead to financial
instability. The 70:30 productive lending quota was lowered to 60:40, interest rate
caps were lifted by two to three points, and unproductive loans were left uncapped.
A later concession was the inclusion of the construction, tourism, and intellectual
472 N. NAQVI
property sectors in the productive sector category to ease pressure on banks in

meeting their targets (Interviews 5, Ministry of Finance; 17, ASOBAN).
Fallout from the FSL 393 and lower commodity prices (2014–2018)
As intended by policymakers, the industrial, agribusiness, and construction sectors
have been the main beneficiaries of cheaper bank credit (ASFI, 2018, p. 10), but it
is still too early to assess whether the FSL is achieving its stated developmental
aims. Despite the predictions of private bankers and the IFIs, the FSL 393 did not
result banking or currency crisis due to mass capital flight, or foreign banks disin-
vesting. Instead total credit to the private sector grew at an average rate of 12% per
year between 2013 and 2018 (ASFI online database, https://www.asfi.gob.bo.; Heng,
2015). Private banks have accommodated themselves to the FSL despite lower prof-
itability, and the alliance between the MAS government and agribusiness elites
remains intact. So far no strong demands for reversal of the FSL 393 have emerged
(Interview 22, CAINCO; Interview 50, former Ministry of Finance).
The end of the commodity boom since 2014 raises questions about the sustain-
ability of this reform. Since commodity prices have fallen, a current account deficit
has emerged, external indebtedness is increasing, and FX reserves are declining.
However, at the time of writing, the sheer scale of reserves accumulated the boom
has meant the economy has not yet felt the full impact of low commodity prices
(Kehoe, Machicado, & Peres-Cajıas, 2019). From 2014, the government has been
compensating for declining commodity revenue by increasing foreign borrowing,
and by encouraging domestic private investment through their alliance with agri-
business (Interview 14, CEPB). At the same time, popular forces have become co-
opted by the government and de-mobilized (Farthing, 2019), which means they
may not be as strong a countervailing force if business power increases again. This
means that as reserves run low, the private sector could regain economic and polit-
ical power and may reverse financial reform.15 Furthermore, external imbalances
could eventually lead to a balance of payments crisis unless adjustments are made.
If this necessitates an IMF program, then interventionist reform could be reversed
under IMF conditionality, even if the domestic financial sector remains weak. On
the other hand, if the new financial regulation builds up a significant support base,
including among real economy business, then reversal may not occur even in the
face of adverse external or domestic circumstances.
Discussion and conclusion: Bolivia in comparative perspective

Bolivia benefitted from two factors, which enabled it to increase external policy
space and reduce domestic business power to re-assert state control over a previ-
ously liberalized financial sector, despite the opposition of both the IMF and
domestic business: plentiful external finance and domestic popular mobilization.
The following sections provide a brief sketch of contrasting cases in order to pro-
vide insights into prospects for similar action in other countries.
The arguments made here should travel to the broader set of developing coun-
tries that are resource rich, and thus have access to resource rents during boom
periods. It should also apply to the even wider range of countries that have access
to nontraditional loans from emerging powers, including Sub-Saharan African, and

Latin American countries where China has increased investments, and a number of
South and South East Asian countries, especially as China’s Belt and Road
Initiative gains in importance. An important finding from the Bolivian case is that
the supply of alternative external financing options only determines potential policy
space. Whether this is translated actual policy space is mediated by domestic polit-
ical factors, highlighting that external financing constraints are partly endogenous
to domestic political factors. Not only do developing countries need to have access
to outside financing options, they also need to use these strategically to reduce con-
ditionalities associated with traditional creditors. This implies that resource rich
countries where popular mobilization is absent, resulting in the sector remaining
predominantly privately or foreign owned, and not heavily taxed, will not necessar-
ily experience an increase in policy space even during boom times. Neither will
countries that have access to outside financing options, but do not use them to
move away from BWI and DAC lenders.
Even if actual policy space is increased through successful manipulation of the
external environment, governments must also use these favorable external condi-
tions strategically to reduce the structural power of domestic finance in order to
implement reforms that they are opposed to. In this regard, comparison with other
Latin American ‘pink tide’ countries like Ecuador where governments broke instru-
mental ties to private finance and also benefitted from the commodity boom,
would be a fruitful avenue for future research, even though outside the scope of
this paper. For example, the structural power of domestic finance could explain
why similar attempts to intervene directly in private banks’ sectoral lending deci-
sions by the developmentalist Correa administration in Ecuador were unsuccessful,
even though it had successfully increased its external policy space by diversifying
into BRICS financing sources (Bunte, 2019), and increasing taxes on oil exporters
(Calvert, 2018, p. 91). Continued dollarization left the financial sector vulnerable to
capital flight, similar to Bolivia in period 2, and forced the Correa administration
to drop the sectoral lending targets that were present in an earlier draft of the
September 2014 Monetary and Financial Code as a compromise with banks
(Economist Intelligence Unit, 2014).
To what extent do the arguments made about commodities revenue and South-
South finance also apply to other forms of investible external finance? While for-
eign aid usually comes with conditionalities, countries that are important to donors
from a geopolitical perspective should be able to leverage their position to obtain a
steady flow of funds, while avoiding conditionalities, as Korea did with US aid dur-
ing the Cold War era (Woo-Cummings, 1991, pp. 6–7). Booms in access to exter-
nal private finance in the form of portfolio flows or bank loans are often conflated
with commodity booms in the literature, even though commodity exports produce
revenue while private financial inflows produce debt. Heavy dependence on port-
folio flows might have distinct implications for policy autonomy. Because down-
turns inevitably result in capital outflow, reliance on private capital flows could
result in financial crisis, necessitating a return to traditional lenders and consequent
structural adjustment. Similarly, when foreign reserves are built from portfolio
inflows rather than export surplus (‘borrowed reserves’), this increases external
liabilities, and leaves the country more vulnerable to capital flight than reserves fig-
ures suggest (Aky€ uz, 2017).
474 N. NAQVI
Findings from the Bolivian case have important implications for the viability of
state-led growth strategies under economic globalization. These are difficult to
implement, because developing country governments are constrained not only by
official and private international creditors, but also domestic economic elites. On
the other hand, though external constraints are strong, they are not constant, and
vary at least partly as a function of domestic political conditions. Furthermore,
popular mobilizations can reduce not only elite instrumental power, but also struc-
tural power, if they exert sufficient pressure on policymakers.
Notes
1. Existing studies on the effectiveness of developmentalist financial policy show it has
been successful in some cases, but not in others (see Griffith-Jones & Ocampo, 2018;
Heng, 2015; Staking, 1997). This paper examines the conditions under which these
policies are implemented, but the question of their effectiveness is outside its scope.
2. By renationalization I mean policies that assert national public control over the
domestic financial sector to guide resource allocation according to domestic policy
priorities. I do not necessarily mean the nationalization of private banks, although
historically this has been one of the main tools used to guide credit.
3. Because industrial policy tools in the areas of finance, trade, and investment, are
governed by different sets of international arrangements and face different domestic
constraints, policy space is likely to be specific to the policy instrument used and the
regime that governs it.
4. Nonelite groups are defined as those that do not own or manage capital.
5. These include industrial manufacturing, agriculture and agribusiness, and extraction
and processing of metals, minerals, and natural gas. ‘Unproductive sectors’ are
broadly services sectors including wholesale and retail (IMF, 2015).
6. A number of countries, including China, India, Vietnam, and Nigeria, continue to
pursue varying degrees of activist financial policy, but are not included in the analysis
because they never seriously liberalised in the first place.
7. and the IADB in 2007.
8. Villegas was one of the key architects of the National Development Plan (PND).
9. While often termed a nationalization, the 2006 hydrocarbons reform did not involve
changes in ownership.
10. The government can however pass reforms as ‘Supreme Decrees’ rather than laws to
bypass parliament.
11. The official refers not to non-elite groups but capital owners and the professional
upper middle classes
12. The Argentinian government froze all bank accounts in order to stop capital flight
and converted US dollar deposits to pesos.
13. External financing was high in the 1990s but came down to 1.6% of bank liabilities in
the 2000s (ASFI, 2005, p. 9).
14. CAINCO and FEPSC sent a letter stating their agreement with the FSL, prior to final
negotiations (Interviews 1–4, Ministry of Finance).
15. This scenario appears to have materialized in the coup of November 2019, although it
remains to be seen how long the unelected government representing Santa Cruz elites
will last, and what their attitude towards financial policy is.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Ngaire Woods, Robert Keohane, John Ikenberry, Diego Sanchez
Ancochea, Sylvia Maxfield, Tom Hale, Florence Dafe, Jose Peres Cajias, Linda Farthing, and the
participants of the Global Leaders Fellowship Colloquium at Princeton University for comments
on earlier drafts of this paper. Special thanks also go to Edwin Rojas Ulo, Peter Knaack, Bismarck
Averecilia, Pablo Mendietta Ossia, and Sara Shields, without whom conducting fieldwork would
have been impossible. All views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Dr. Natalya Naqvi is Assistant Professor in International Political Economy at the Department of
International Relations at the London School of Economics. She was previously a postdoctoral
research fellow at the Global Economic Governance Program at Blavatnik School of Governance,
Oxford University and the Neihaus Center for Globalization and Governance, at the Woodrow
Wilson School, Princeton University. She holds a PhD from the Centre of Development Studies,
University of Cambridge. Her research interests revolve around the role of the state and the finan-
cial sector in economic development, and how much policy space developing countries have to
conduct selective industrial policies despite the constraints posed by economic globalization.
References
Aky€uz, Y. (2017). Playing with fire: Deepened financial integration and changing vulnerabilities of
the global south. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Amsden, A. H. (1992). Asia’s next giant: South Korea and late industrialization. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
ASFI. (2005). Analisis del Sistema Financiero a Diciembre 2016. Retrieved from https://www.asfi.
gob.bo/index.php/analisis-del-sistema-financiero.html.
ASFI. (2018). Cartera de Creditos al Sector Productivo. Retrieved from https://www.asfi.gob.bo/
images/INT_FINANCIERA/DOCS/Publicaciones/Credito_Productivo.pdf.
Bunte, J. (2019). Raise the debt: How developing countries choose their creditors. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Calvert, J. (2018). Constructing investor rights? Why some states (fail to) terminate bilateral
investment treaties. Review of International Political Economy, 25(1), 75–97. doi:10.1080/
09692290.2017.1406391
Campello, D. (2015). The politics of market discipline in Latin America: Globalization and democ-
racy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
CEPB. (2013). Ley de Bancos: Propuestas y lineamientos. Propuesta de polıtica p ublica – UAL.
Retrieved from http://www.cepb.org.bo/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/LineamientosParaUnaLey
DeBancosPropuestaPoliticaPublica.pdf.
Chenery, H. B., & Strout, A. (1966). Foreign assistance and economic development. American
Economic Review, 56(4), 679–733.
Chwieroth, J. M. (2007). Testing and measuring the role of ideas: The case of neoliberalism in the
International Monetary Fund. International Studies Quarterly, 51(1), 5–30. doi:10.1111/j.1468-
2478.2007.00437.x
Conaghan, C. M. (1992). The private sector and the public transcript: the political mobilization of
business in Bolivia (Vol. 176). Notre Dame, Indiana: Helen Kellogg Institute for International
Studies, University of Notre Dame.
Culpepper, P. D. (2015). Structural power and political science in the post-crisis era. Business and
Politics, 17(3), 391–409. doi:10.1515/bap-2015-0031
Eaton, K. (2007). Backlash in Bolivia: Regional autonomy as a reaction against indigenous mobil-
ization. Politics & Society, 35(1), 71–102. doi:10.1177/0032329206297145
Eaton, K. (2011). Conservative autonomy movements: Territorial dimensions of ideological conflict
in Bolivia and Ecuador. Comparative Politics, 43(3), 291–310. doi:10.5129/001041511795274896
476 N. NAQVI
Economist Intelligence Unit. (2014). Ecuador’s new monetary code takes effect with revisions EIU
Financial Services. Retrieved from http://www.eiu.com/industry/article/1122267296/ecuadors-
new-monetary-code-takes-effect-with-revisions/2014-09-10.
Eju (2011). 21 Grupos corporativos son due~ nos de la banca en Bolivia. Eju Tv. Retrieved from
http://eju.tv/2011/08/21-grupos-corporativos-son-dueos-de-la-banca-en-bolivia/.
Fairfield, T. (2015). Private wealth and public revenue. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Farthing, L. (2019). An opportunity squandered? Elites, social movements, and the government of
Evo Morales. Latin American Perspectives, 46(1), 212–229. doi:10.1177/0094582X18798797
Gallagher, K. P. (2015). Countervailing monetary power: Re-regulating capital flows in Brazil and
South Korea. Review of International Political Economy, 22(1), 77–102. doi:10.1080/09692290.
2014.915577
Grabel, I. (2018). When things don’t fall apart: Global financial governance and developmental
finance in an age of productive incoherence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Griffith-Jones, S. and Ocampo, J. A. (Eds.). (2018). The future of national development banks.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haggard, S., & Maxfield, S. (1993). Political explanations of financial policy. In S. Haggard, C.
Lee, and S. I. Maxfield (Eds.) The politics of finance in developing countries. New York, NY:
Cornell University Press.
Mazzucato, M., & Penna, C. C. (2016). Beyond market failures: The market creating and shaping
roles of state investment banks. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 19(4), 305–326. doi:10.
1080/17487870.2016.1216416
Naqvi, N., Henow, A., & Chang, H. J. (2018). Kicking away the financial ladder? German develop-
ment banking under economic globalisation. Review of International Political Economy, 25(5),
672–698. doi:10.1080/09692290.2018.1480515
Heng, D. (2015). Impact of the New Financial Services Law in Bolivia on Financial Stability and
Inclusion. Working Paper No. 15/267. Washington DC: IMF. doi:10.5089/9781513598420.001
IMF. (1999). Monetary Policy in Dollarized Economics. IMF Occasional Paper 171, Retrieved from
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/nft/op/171/.
IMF. (2003). Selected Issues and Statistical Appendix. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/en/
Publications/CR/Issues/2016/12/30/Bolivia-Selected-Issues-and-Statistical-Appendix-16818.
IMF. (2005a). Bolivia: Sixth Review Under the Stand-By Arrangement. Retrieved from http://www.
imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2016/12/31/Bolivia-Sixth-Review-Under-the-Stand-By-Arrangement-
and-Requests-for-Modification-and-Waiver-18682.
IMF. (2005b). Bolivia: Ex-Post Assessment of Longer-Term Program Engagement. Retrieved from
http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2016/12/31/Bolivia-Ex-Post-Assessment-of-Longer-
Term-Program-Engagement-18210.
IMF. (2006). Bolivia: Staff Report for the 2006 Article IV Consultation. Retrieved from http://
www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2016/12/31/Bolivia-Staff-Report-for-the-2006-Article-IV-
Consultation-19472.
IMF (2014). Bolivia: Staff Report for the 2013 Article IV Consultation. Retrieved from http://
www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=41310.0.
Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, INE online database. Retrieved from https://www.ine.gob.bo/
index.php/estadisticas-por-actividad-economica.
Kehoe, T. J., Machicado, C. G., & Peres-Cajıas, J. (2019). The Monetary and Fiscal History of
Bolivia, 1960–2017 National Bureau of Economic Research. Working paper No. W25523.
Kilby, P. (2012). Rare Bolivia Bond Market Issue Surprises Market. Reuters. Retrieved from https://
www.reuters.com/article/bonds-bolivia-latam/rare-bolivia-issue-surprises-bond-market-
idUSL1E8LO6RG20121024.
Kohl, B., & Farthing, L. (2009). Less than fully satisfactory development outcomes” International
Financial Institutions and Social Unrest in Bolivia. Latin American Perspectives, 36(3), 59–78.
doi:10.1177/0094582X09334300
La Razon. (2013). Ley de Servicios Financieros fue sancionada. La Razon Retrieved from http://
www.la-razon.com/economia/Ley-Servicios-Financieros-sancionada_0_1883211696.html.
La Razon. (2016). La historia de los procesos electorales entre 2005 y 2016. La Razon. Retrieved from
http://www.la-razon.com/index.php?_url=/nacional/historia-procesos electorales_0_2440555959.html.
L
opez, H. G. (2001). The Private Sector and Democratization. In Crabtree, J., & Whitehead, L.
(Eds.). Towards democratic viability: The Bolivian experience (pp. 160–178). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Loriaux, M., Loriaux, M. M., Woo-Cumings, M., Calder, K., Maxfield, S., & Perez, S. (1997).
Capital ungoverned: Liberalizing finance in interventionist states. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press.
Ministerio de Economia Y Financas Publicas. (2015). ‘Economic Social Communitarian Productive
Model’ EcoPlural. (1st ed.). La Paz: Ministerio de Economia Y Financas Publicas.
Ministerio de Planificaci on del Desarrollo. (2007). Decreto Supremo 29272: Plan Nacional de
Desarrollo: Bolivia Digna, Soberana, Productiva y Democratica para Vivir Bien, Lineamientos
Estrategicos 2006–2011. La Paz: Gaceta Oficial de Bolivia
Mitchell, J. (2013). Successful implementation of a plural economy: Interview with Luis Arce,
Bolivian minister of economy and public finances. In Euromoney Trading Ltd (Ed.) The 2013
guide to Bolivia. London: Euromoney Trading Ltd.
Molina, G. (2010). The challenge of progressive change under Evo Morales. In K. Weyland, R. L.
Madrid, & W. Hunter, (Eds.). Leftist governments in Latin America: Successes and shortcomings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morales, J. A. (2003). Dollarization of assets and liabilities: Problem or solution? The case of
Bolivia. Revista de Analisis Del Banco Central de Bolivia, 6, 7.
Morales, J. A. (2005). Bolivia: An economy (almost) without state owned banks. Presentation of the
Central Bank of Bolivia. Retrieved from https://www.slideserve.com/Renfred/bolivia-an-econ-
omy-almost-without-state-owned-banks.
Mosley, L. (2003). Global capital and national governments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS). (2005a). Principios Ideologicos del MAS. Retrieved from https://
web.archive.org/web/20060207142552/http://www.mas.org.bo/principios_ideologicos_mas.html.
Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS). (2005b). Plan de Desarollo Productivo. Retrieved from https://
web.archive.org/web/20060207141815/http://www.mas.org.bo/cuatro.htm.
Orellana, A. L. (2016). Resurgimiento y caida de la gente decente: Un sender en la formacion de
una clase-etnia dominante en Bolivia (1940-2003). La Paz: Muela Del Diablo Editores.
Pepinsky, T. B. (2013). The domestic politics of financial internationalization in the developing
world. Review of International Political Economy, 20(4), 848–880. doi:10.1080/09692290.2012.
727361
Rickard, S. J. (2010). Democratic differences: Electoral institutions and compliance with GATT/
WTO agreements. European Journal of International Relations, 16(4), 711–729. doi:10.1177/
1354066109346890
Reuters Staff. (2009). Bolivia says it thwarts Morales assassination plot. Reuters. Retrieved from
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN16257097.
Salmon, F. P. (2007). Tercer Ensayo: Poder y Elites Hoy: Quienes Son y Como Ejercen Su Poder. In
S. S. Antelo, C. P. Claros, and F. P. Salmon (Eds.). Poder y Elites en Santa Cruz: Tres Visiones
Sobre un Mismo Tema. Santa Cruz: Centro de Estudios Para el Desarollo Urbano y Regional.
Shadlen, K. C. (2005). Exchanging development for market access? Deep integration and industrial
policy under multilateral and regional-bilateral trade agreements. Review of International
Political Economy, 12(5), 750–775. doi:10.1080/09692290500339685
Staking, K. B. (Ed.). (1997). Policy-based finance and market alternatives: East Asian lessons for
Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
Thurbon, E. (2016). Developmental mindset: The revival of financial activism in South Korea.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wade, R. H. (2003). What strategies are viable for developing countries today? The World Trade
Organization and the shrinking of ‘development space. Review of International Political
Economy, 10(4), 621–644. doi:10.1080/09692290310001601902
Webber, J. R. (2008). Rebellion to reform in Bolivia. Part III: Neoliberal continuities, the autono-
mist Right, and the political economy of indigenous struggle. Historical Materialism, 16(4),
67–109. doi:10.1163/156920608X357738
Weisbrot, M., & Sandoval, L. (2006). Bolivia’s challenges. Washington, DC: Center for Economic
and Policy Research Report.
Winters, J. A. (1994). Power and the control of capital. World Politics, 46(3), 419–452. doi:10.
2307/2950688
478 N. NAQVI
Wolff, J. (2016). Business power and the politics of postneoliberalism: Relations between govern-
ments and economic elites in Bolivia and Ecuador. Latin American Politics and Society, 58(2),
124–147. doi:10.1111/j.1548-2456.2016.00313.x
Woll, C. (2014). The power of inaction: Bank bailouts in comparison. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
Woo-Cummings, J. E. (1991). Race to the swift: State and finance in Korean industrialization. New
York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Woods, N. (2006). The globalizers: The IMF, the World Bank, and their borrowers. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press.

Renationalizing Finance For Development Policy Space and Public Economic Control in Bolivia (Naqvi 2021)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Renationalizing Finance For Development Policy Space and Public Economic Control in Bolivia (Naqvi 2021)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Renationalizing Finance For Development Policy Space and Public Economic Control in Bolivia (Naqvi 2021)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review of International Political Economy

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rrip20

Renationalizing finance for development: policy

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1696870

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa View supplementary material

Published online: 17 Dec 2019. Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5325 View related articles

View Crossmark data Citing articles: 12 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Renationalizing finance for development: policy

Introduction: Renationalizing finance for development

CONTACT Natalya Naqvi n.naqvi@lse.ac.uk International Relations, London School of Economics,

Economic globalization and policy space

conditionalities. Constraints have intensified since economic globalization began in

Domestic explanations for policy space

According to an extensive business politics literature, the ability of govern-

Popular mobilization, state action, and business power

Renationalization of finance in Bolivia

Table 1. Three period within-case comparisons.

reform. In period 2, popular mobilization lead to the election of a developmentalist

business elites to become sectorally divided, further reducing finance’s instrumental

Research design and methods

The negotiation of the FSL 393 and its effects

Period 1. (2000–2006): commodity boom, strong business power, and

The government was particularly reliant on traditional land owning agribusiness

Current account as % GDP (LHS)

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3

Figure 2. Bolivia’s external financing conditions and the commodity boom.

Table 3. Bolivian economic structure.

Table 4. Market share and ownership of large Bolivian commercial banks.

Popular mobilization and the rise of MAS

Period 2 (2006–2009): increased policy space, weakened instrumental

Popular mobilization, electoral victory, and developmental policymakers

p. 11). Multinational hydrocarbons companies and new domestic industrial SOEs

Strategic use of international financing

Figure 3. Public external debt owed to major creditors (% total).

Instrumental power of business

Structural power of business

Figure 4. Changes in the Bolivian productive structure under MAS.

Period 3 (2010–2014): Reduced structural power: From conflict to an

tap in to yet another source of low-conditionality foreign capital (Figure 3).

Business preferences and power

Table 5. Preferences of business associations with regards to the FSL 393.

property sectors in the productive sector category to ease pressure on banks in

Discussion and conclusion: Bolivia in comparative perspective

to nontraditional loans from emerging powers, including Sub-Saharan African, and

You might also like