"Alleviating poverty would be the Bank's overarching objective"
About this Quote
A banker promising to fight poverty is either a genuine pivot or a carefully calibrated act of institutional self-defense. Lewis Thompson Preston’s line, “Alleviating poverty would be the Bank’s overarching objective,” works because it tries to rewrite what a development bank is supposed to be. “Overarching” signals not just a new program but a moral umbrella meant to cover everything else the World Bank funds: infrastructure, loans, policy advice, and the political bargains that come with them. It’s branding, but also a bid for legitimacy in an era when legitimacy was fraying.
The context matters. By the late Cold War and into the early 1990s, the Bank was catching sustained criticism for structural adjustment policies that, in many countries, were experienced less as “reform” than as austerity: cut social spending, liberalize quickly, pay debts, and hope growth trickles down. Preston’s sentence doesn’t argue with those critiques directly; it sidesteps them by elevating an unassailable end-state. Poverty alleviation becomes a rhetorical solvent: it dissolves questions about whose poverty, caused by what, and alleviated on whose terms.
The subtext is managerial and political at once. It implies that previous objectives were too technocratic, too macro, too easily accused of serving creditors over citizens. Yet it also protects the Bank’s preferred tools: if poverty is the goal, almost any intervention can be justified as indirectly serving it. The genius and the risk of the line are the same: it sounds like a moral commitment, while leaving the definition, measurement, and accountability safely in the Bank’s hands.
The context matters. By the late Cold War and into the early 1990s, the Bank was catching sustained criticism for structural adjustment policies that, in many countries, were experienced less as “reform” than as austerity: cut social spending, liberalize quickly, pay debts, and hope growth trickles down. Preston’s sentence doesn’t argue with those critiques directly; it sidesteps them by elevating an unassailable end-state. Poverty alleviation becomes a rhetorical solvent: it dissolves questions about whose poverty, caused by what, and alleviated on whose terms.
The subtext is managerial and political at once. It implies that previous objectives were too technocratic, too macro, too easily accused of serving creditors over citizens. Yet it also protects the Bank’s preferred tools: if poverty is the goal, almost any intervention can be justified as indirectly serving it. The genius and the risk of the line are the same: it sounds like a moral commitment, while leaving the definition, measurement, and accountability safely in the Bank’s hands.
Quote Details
| Topic | Human Rights |
|---|
More Quotes by Lewis
Add to List
