At the opposite end of the spectrum are regions such as Europe and East Asia, where populations are rapidly ageing—and some are even shrinking.
We can also make opposites attract. We can find ways to better connect Africa’s abundant human resources with the abundant capital in advanced economies and major emerging markets.
How can we ensure that capital flows in the right direction? For African countries, the key is to attract long-term investors and ensure stable trade flows.
This means promoting better growth: from improving the business environment, to raising more revenue, and weeding out inefficient spending. For countries that are already facing strained budgets and high debt, this would create more room for vital social spending.
Just one example from IMF research: by building tax capacity, low-income counties could boost their annual budget revenues by up to 9 percent of GDP—a big increase that would bring their tax effort into line with emerging-market economies.
This is where the global financial safety net is crucial. And this where the IMF plays a crucial role—as the insurer of the uninsured.
If the right kind of international support can be combined with the right kind of domestic polices, we could see Africa attracting long-term flows of investment, technology, and know-how.
And this could unlock the full potential of its young people.
The result? It would mean more jobs and less outward migration in Africa; higher returns on capital that could be used in advanced economies, including to make their pension systems more sustainable; and overall, a more dynamic global economy.
In short: a prosperous world in the coming century requires a prosperous Africa.
4. Conclusion: A 21st Century Multilateralism
Investments in these three key areas—technology, climate, and people—are critical. But again, we cannot do it without cooperation.
Keynes gave us a framework—a ‘multilateralism for the 20th century’ that served us well. Now we must update it for a new era.
What would a ‘21st-century multilateralism’ look like? Let me suggest a few basic principles:
- It would be more representative, with a better balance between advanced economies and the voices of the emerging and developing countries.
- It would be more open and ‘listening’—not only to official but also non-official voices, those of communities and social organizations based on common interest.
- It would be more results-oriented, with more concrete deliverables—which would reinforce the benefits of cooperation, both economic and social.
Updating the multilateral framework also means updating multilateral institutions, including the IMF.
If Keynes were to visit the Fund today, I suspect he might be surprised by how much we have changed in scale, scope and character.
Just since the pandemic, we have provided about $1 trillion in liquidity and financing to our 190 member countries. We introduced programs for emergency financing and direct debt relief for our poorest members. And our macroeconomic work now includes a focus on climate, gender, and digital money.
We are the only institution in the world empowered by our members to carry out regular “health checks” of their economies. Providing impartial analysis and advice is critical, especially in a world of fake news and political polarization.
We also recognize the need to put in place better measurement of wealth that goes beyond the traditional GDP, that values not only produced capital, but also nature, people, and the fabric of societies.
I hope Keynes would approve of a “global balance sheet” that includes an expanded set of assets and recognizes the valuable services provided by the environment, the value of the knowledge and ingenuity embodied in people and the value of good governance.
And he might be astonished to see so many women, including in positions of power.
I think he would like what he sees and would encourage us to go even further as a global “transmission line” for sound economic policies, financial resources, knowledge—and as the ultimate platform for global economic cooperation.
This remains the “special ingredient”. We cannot have a better world without cooperation. On this most fundamental of points, Keynes was again right!
**************
He is perhaps best remembered for something he wrote in 1923: “In the long run, we are all dead”—by which he meant the following:
Instead of waiting for market forces to fix things over the long run, policymakers should try to resolve problems in the short run. It’s a call to action, a vision of something better and brighter.
And it’s a call to which I for one am determined to respond — to do my part for my grandchildren’s better future.
Because, as Keynes put it in 1942: “In the long run almost anything is possible.”
Thank you.
