In November 1991, the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF; at present JBIC) presented at regular policy consultations with the World Bank a paper entitled "Issues Related to the World Bank's Approach to Structural Adjustment: A Proposal from a Major Partner" ("the Shimomura Paper"), raising important problems regarding the desirable form of the SALs that the World Bank had introduced in 1979.

When the cumulative debt problems of developing countries worsened by the second oil crisis of 1979, the World Bank provided support for international balance of payments (structural adjustment loans) conditioned on policy changes in these countries. In this context, Japan also recognized the necessity for such support, and started to provide through the OECF co-financing for World Bank SALs from 1986, extending in the subsequent period until fiscal year 1991 approximately 450 billion yen in support in total.

On their execution, SALs were given borrowing conditions called "conditionality." These conditions were based on the neoclassical school of economic theory, placing emphasis on market principles. To be specific, implementation of policies of trade liberalization and privatization are set as the conditions for loans, while aiming to improve the economic structure of loan recipient countries and stabilization of their economic conditions through implementation of these policies are set as the objective. However, some recipient countries cannot yet prepare the ground for adopting policies of trade liberalization and privatization. Among them, there are also some countries in which execution of policies based on conditionality led rather to confusion, increases in domestic poverty and the disruption of rising inflation.

Japan, based on the consistent stance of placing emphasis on the self-help efforts of developing countries themselves, had provided developing assistance while giving full consideration to the domestic conditions of individual developing countries in the implementation of individual projects. Furthermore, from the experience of Japan itself and the development experiences of Asia, Japan had come to recognize that the concept of conditionality associated with the SALs of the World Bank was not suited to the actual economic and social conditions of developing countries.

The Shimomura Paper acknowledged the point that promotion of efficiency in distribution of resources through market principles—which forms the background to the concept of conditionality—is important in economic policy. However, it also pointed out that policy emphasizing only that point lacks balance, and—contrary to its intended effect—loses the significance of introduction of market principles. It gave consideration to not only promoting deregulation and liberalization and privatization of trade, but also the possibility of exerting a disadvantageous effect on the socially weak by pursuing economic efficiency, while raising the problem of the necessity to conduct policy assessment from a balanced, long-term perspective that maximizes the welfare of society as a whole.

After its publication, the Shimomura Paper was read not only by the World Bank but also by many people involved in development, casting the first stone in the debate regarding review of SALs. It led to a movement within the World Bank to seek improvement of SALs, as well as one to reconsider the desirable form of development, questioning what should be done to achieve the sustainable development of developing countries.

Subsequently, the arguments of Japan, which placed emphasis on aspects such as the validity of the role of governments of developing countries, aroused further interest through the publication of "The East Asian Miracle" (1983), a report compiled by the World Bank in response to the initiative of Japan, disseminating a tolerant position on economic policy that differed from neoclassical economics.