States and Economic Development
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2009 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista de Economia Política |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-31572009000200003 |
Resumo: | Today the Washington Consensus on development lies in tatters. The recent history of the developing world has been unkind to the core claim that a nation that opens its economy and keeps government's role to a minimum invariably experiences rapid economic growth. The evidence against this claim is strong: the developing world as a whole grew faster during the era of state intervention and import substitution (1950-1980) than in the more recent era of structural adjustment (1990-2005); and the recent economic performance of both Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africaregions that truly embraced neoliberalismhas lagged well behind that of many Asian economies, which have instead pursued judicial and unorthodox combinations of state intervention and economic openness. As scholars and policy makers reconstruct alternatives to the Washington Consensus on development, it is important to underline that prudent and effective state intervention and selective integration with the global economy have been responsible for development success in the past; they are also likely to remain the recipes for upward mobility in the global economy in the future." |
id |
EDITORA_34-1_299fba2d6d969c9be51dd795eaaf4745 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0101-31572009000200003 |
network_acronym_str |
EDITORA_34-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista de Economia Política |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
States and Economic Developmentstates and industrializationgrowth in developing countriesSouth KoreaIndiaNigeria and Brazilstate types and state capacityToday the Washington Consensus on development lies in tatters. The recent history of the developing world has been unkind to the core claim that a nation that opens its economy and keeps government's role to a minimum invariably experiences rapid economic growth. The evidence against this claim is strong: the developing world as a whole grew faster during the era of state intervention and import substitution (1950-1980) than in the more recent era of structural adjustment (1990-2005); and the recent economic performance of both Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africaregions that truly embraced neoliberalismhas lagged well behind that of many Asian economies, which have instead pursued judicial and unorthodox combinations of state intervention and economic openness. As scholars and policy makers reconstruct alternatives to the Washington Consensus on development, it is important to underline that prudent and effective state intervention and selective integration with the global economy have been responsible for development success in the past; they are also likely to remain the recipes for upward mobility in the global economy in the future."Centro de Economia Política2009-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-31572009000200003Brazilian Journal of Political Economy v.29 n.2 2009reponame:Revista de Economia Políticainstname:EDITORA 34instacron:EDITORA_3410.1590/S0101-31572009000200003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKohli,Atuleng2009-04-24T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0101-31572009000200003Revistahttps://centrodeeconomiapolitica.org.br/repojs/index.php/journalONGhttps://centrodeeconomiapolitica.org.br/repojs/index.php/journal/oai||cecilia.heise@bjpe.org.br1809-45380101-3157opendoar:2009-04-24T00:00Revista de Economia Política - EDITORA 34false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
States and Economic Development |
title |
States and Economic Development |
spellingShingle |
States and Economic Development Kohli,Atul states and industrialization growth in developing countries South Korea India Nigeria and Brazil state types and state capacity |
title_short |
States and Economic Development |
title_full |
States and Economic Development |
title_fullStr |
States and Economic Development |
title_full_unstemmed |
States and Economic Development |
title_sort |
States and Economic Development |
author |
Kohli,Atul |
author_facet |
Kohli,Atul |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Kohli,Atul |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
states and industrialization growth in developing countries South Korea India Nigeria and Brazil state types and state capacity |
topic |
states and industrialization growth in developing countries South Korea India Nigeria and Brazil state types and state capacity |
description |
Today the Washington Consensus on development lies in tatters. The recent history of the developing world has been unkind to the core claim that a nation that opens its economy and keeps government's role to a minimum invariably experiences rapid economic growth. The evidence against this claim is strong: the developing world as a whole grew faster during the era of state intervention and import substitution (1950-1980) than in the more recent era of structural adjustment (1990-2005); and the recent economic performance of both Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africaregions that truly embraced neoliberalismhas lagged well behind that of many Asian economies, which have instead pursued judicial and unorthodox combinations of state intervention and economic openness. As scholars and policy makers reconstruct alternatives to the Washington Consensus on development, it is important to underline that prudent and effective state intervention and selective integration with the global economy have been responsible for development success in the past; they are also likely to remain the recipes for upward mobility in the global economy in the future." |
publishDate |
2009 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2009-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-31572009000200003 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-31572009000200003 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0101-31572009000200003 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Centro de Economia Política |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Centro de Economia Política |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Political Economy v.29 n.2 2009 reponame:Revista de Economia Política instname:EDITORA 34 instacron:EDITORA_34 |
instname_str |
EDITORA 34 |
instacron_str |
EDITORA_34 |
institution |
EDITORA_34 |
reponame_str |
Revista de Economia Política |
collection |
Revista de Economia Política |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista de Economia Política - EDITORA 34 |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||cecilia.heise@bjpe.org.br |
_version_ |
1754122480701669376 |