When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Economy

How Dollarization Saved Ecuador's Economy

When Ecuador ditched its currency for the dollar in 2000, it deprived governments the possibility to overspend, and gave ordinary people control of their money.

Counting dollar bills in a market in downtown Quito, Ecuador
Counting dollar bills in a market in downtown Quito, Ecuador
Mauricio Ríos García

-OpEd-

LA PAZ — This month marks 20 years since the most successful monetary policy in Ecuador's history: dollarization and the shutting down the Central Bank. While some still criticize the move, and the former president even tried to reverse it, the economic benefits of dollarization are clear. On this anniversary, it's worth looking more closely at what the move has meant for the country.

Dollarization in Ecuador, which officially took place on Jan. 9, 2000, has been the subject of myths and speculation. The same can be said for the role of the currency and the Central bank in the economy, the nature of inflation, or how exchange rates can affect exports and a country's competitive profile. These have been of relevance at least since the mercantilist system of the 15th and 16th centuries.

Dollarization's first and foremost success since imposed in January 2000, was to check inflation and the so-called "inflation-tax." That is effectively a tax that needs no parliamentary approval and would have allowed someone like President Rafael Correa, who wanted to recover the Sucre currency, to lay his hands on the savings of people forced to use the old currency.

Likewise as the analyst Gabriela Calderón has said, one of dollarization's biggest benefits was to eliminate any possibility of public finances affecting the banking and financial system. With a fiscal crisis equal to or worse than Argentina's today, Ecuador most likely would have had to devalue the Sucre countless times as a public financing mechanism. Dollarization makes it impossible for currency devaluation to slide toward a typical financial crisis.

Private investment would be even more costly with a highly volatile national currency.

Another myth is that dollarization has made Ecuador's productive structure more costly, yielding bad results in terms of competitiveness. Yet if reduced competitiveness were due to the exchange rate, Ecuador could not benefit from the current state of globalization as it does, without dollar-priced products. As in Bolivia, Ecuador's relatively low competitive profile is due to its rigid labor regime, taxes, highly protectionist trade policies, and a hyper-regulated and obsolete banking and financial system. Private investment in Ecuador would be even more costly with a highly volatile national currency.

Why was it practically impossible for Correa to renationalize the currency? Because in contrast with the Argentinian convertibility plan in the 1990s under President Carlos Menem, the dollars were not in the hands of politicians and tax-greedy governments, nor in the banking or financial system — but with ordinary people.

Fortunately, in the same way that it was difficult for countries like Greece and Italy to abandon the euro to recover the drachma or lira to liquidate their bloated debts and pay off deficits, so Ecuador and its politicians were unable to abandon the dollar in recent years. And just like in Bolivia, the biggest risk to the economy now would be to abandon a fixed exchange rate.

You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
  • $2.90/month or $19.90/year. No hidden charges. Cancel anytime.
Already a subscriber? Log in

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
Society

How India’s Women Are Fighting Air Pollution — And The Patriarchy

India is one of the world's worst countries for air pollution, with women more likely to be affected by the problem than men. Now, experts and activists are fighting to reframe pollution as a gendered health crisis.

A woman walking through dense fog in New Delhi

*Saumya Kalia

MUMBAI In New Delhi, a city that has topped urban air-pollution charts in recent years, Shakuntala describes a discomfort that has become too familiar. Surrounded by bricks and austere buildings, she tells an interviewer: "The eyes burn and it becomes difficult to breathe". She is referring to the noxious fumes she routinely breathes as a construction worker.

Like Shakuntala, women’s experiences of polluted air fill every corner of their lives – inside homes, in parks and markets, on the way to work. Ambient air in most districts in India has never been worse than it is today. As many as 1.67 million people in the country die prematurely due to polluted air. It is India’s second largest health risk after malnutrition.

This risk of exposure to air pollution is compounded for women. Their experiences of toxic air are more frequent and often more hazardous. Yet “policies around air quality have not yet adequately taken into account gender or other factors that might influence people’s health,” Pallavi Pant, a senior scientist at the Health Effects Institute, a nonprofit in the U.S., told The Wire Science.

“It’s unacceptable that the biggest burden [rests on] those who can least bear it,” Sherebanu Frosh, an activist, added. People like her are building a unique resistance within India.

Keep reading...Show less

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
  • $2.90/month or $19.90/year. No hidden charges. Cancel anytime.
Already a subscriber? Log in
THE LATEST
FOCUS
TRENDING TOPICS

Central to the tragic absurdity of this war is the question of language. Vladimir Putin has repeated that protecting ethnic Russians and the Russian-speaking populations of Ukraine was a driving motivation for his invasion.

Yet one month on, a quick look at the map shows that many of the worst-hit cities are those where Russian is the predominant language: Kharkiv, Odesa, Kherson.

Watch VideoShow less
MOST READ