The purpose of this paper is to analyse Bolivias development regarding the reduction of poverty. This is done on the one hand under the Washington Consensus, the policy strategy of the IMF (1984-2003), and on the other hand under the governance of Evo Morales (since 2006).First of all the theoretical background of the two strategies are presented. That is the market orientated setting of the IMFs Washington Consensus, namely the Solow growth model, the Kuznets hypothesis and the convergence theory. Out of this neoliberal strategies objected by the IMF a great deal of critique developed, this could be summarized as the ?alternative? approach to reforms. In this paper the ?New Political Economy? by Joseph Stiglitz, the ?New Growth Strategie? by Dani Rodrik and the ?Poverty Traps Theory? by C. Azariadis /J. Stachurski are mentioned, which could be seen as ?alternative? poverty reduction strategies. These two approaches differ essentially in dealing with problems of increasing inequality, volatility and the role of the state as an economic actor.The empirical part of this paper tries to point out the impact of the two highly differential methods on the objective of poverty reduction in Bolivia. This is done by dividing Bolivias development in the ?Pre-Reform-Period? (1952-1984), the 1st Generation of Reform (1985-1990), the 2nd Generation of Reform (1990-2003) and the age of the governance of Evo Morales (since 2006). The conclusion of this investigation, which is based on data of the World Bank, is clear: The measures taken by the IMF failed to decrease poverty, contrariwise the poverty situation got worse and the division of assets got more unequal than ever. While the measures which so far have been taken by the Morales government seem quite auspicious. Although there is a positive tendency, a slightly decrease in poverty, the future will show the impact on the social wealth of Bolivia.