The answer is D, all of the above. In its early years, IFC was so small and private sector development so lightly regarded in aid theory that even its executive vice presidents referred to it as a “special situations” institution. Former EVP William Ryrie, in his book First World, Third World, has noted that, upon reading IFC’s early history, one could only conclude that it was regarded at first as an “irrelevant oddity.”
Others were far more enthusiastic. The New York Times opined shortly after the creation of IFC that private sector development was so important that no amount of experimenting was too much. Even though IFC was a sort of “halfway stage” between a laboratory and a factory, the Times argued that it was well worth trying. A group of Harvard University researchers in 1957, meanwhile, concluded a lengthy report on the creation and role of IFC with the conclusion that its role would have global impact, as the institution would become “the custodian of the concept of free enterprise.”
If you have an idea for a “postcard from the past,” please email Celeste Diaz Ferraro at cdiazferraro@ifc.org.
