{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01643835616438356, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010958904109589041, 'mean_word_length': 5.091666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Neoliberalism is dead, long live neoliberalism? Neostructuralism and the international aid regime of the 2000s

In the 2000s a new aid regime evolved. This promised to move beyond the former neoliberal approach in a number of ways. It would involve greater consultation between donors and recipients, shift the focus from economic growth to broader factors, including poverty, and hand back the responsibility for this to the nation-state. This approach bears strong resemblance to the rise of neostructuralism, a development paradigm that has become highly influential in Latin America. In this article we trace the shifts in the aid regime and ask to what extent the contemporary regime can be defined a postneoliberal paradigm.