Preview

Economics of Contemporary Russia

Advanced search

Problems of the Evolution of the Comparative Capitalism Theory from the mid‑20th Century (On the Example of the Developed Countries)

https://doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2019-4(87)-7-20

Abstract

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries the problem of theoretical substantiation of transnational differences in the forms of capitalist relations became the subject of a broad scientific discussion. Given article deals with the ideas about the causes and consequences of the differentiation of the principles of capitalist society organization, and the authors consciously limit its geographical coverage to developed countries. It was the states of the Core of World economy that were in the focus of publications of the second half of the 20th centurywhich used the methods of comparative analysis within the framework of the theories of regulation, developmentalism, dependent capitalism, neo-corporatism, post-Fordism, etc. Modern concepts of comparative capitalism, especially focusing on emerging markets, are based on a variety of approaches to distinguish national models of capitalist relations. Despite the pluralism of typological criteria, many of these approaches basically contain provisions of the “varieties of capitalism” theory (VoC) developed in the early 2000s. Relying on its key postulate on the existence of various types of institutional complementarity, the authors of given article explain the principles of divergence of liberal and coordinated market economies, as well as analyze the groundings for identifying a mixed type of capitalism. It should be noted that the prospects for the adaptation of provisions of “varieties of capitalism” binary theory to analyze the experience of countries with emerging markets, including post-socialist states, remain vague. It’s noteworthy, that during the post-crisis recovery period of the late 2000s the VoC approach has undergone a certain transformation under the influence of new conditions of global economy functioning, having opposed its own methodological flexibility to the spread of alternative theories of the organization of capitalist systems.

About the Authors

Mikhail M. Lobanov
Center for Eastern European studies, Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow
Russian Federation


Svetlana P. Glinkina
Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow
Russian Federation


References

1. Akamatsu K. (1962). A historical pattern of economic growth in developing countries. Journal of Developing Economies, no. 1, pp. 3–25.

2. Albert M. (1993). Capitalism against capitalism. London, Whurr.

3. Aoki M. (1994). The Japanese firm as a system of attributes: a survey and research agenda. The Japanese firm: Sources of competitive strength. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

4. Baccaro L., Pontusson J. (2016). Rethinking comparative political economy: The growth model perspective. Politics & Society, no. 44 (2), pp. 175–207.

5. Becattini G. (ed.) (1987). Mercato e forzelocali: Il distretto industriale. Bologna, il Mulino.

6. Bohle D., Greskovits B. (2012). Capitalist Diversity on Europe’s Periphery. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

7. Boyer R. (1990). The regulation school: A critical introduction. Columbia University Press.

8. Evans P. B. (1979). Dependent development: The alliance of multinational, state, and local capital in Brazil. Princeton University Press.

9. Frank A. G. (1967). Capitalism and under development in Latin America. New York, NYU Press.

10. Fukuyama F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man, New York, Free Press.

11. Glinkina S. P. (2016). On the diversity of capitalism models, or What we have built as aresult of transformation: a report. Moscow: Institute of Economics RAS (in Russian).

12. Glinkina S. P., Kulikova N. V. (2018). On the model of capitalism in Central and Eastern Europe. Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk [Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of Russian Academy of Sciences], no. 3, pp. 9–24 (in Russian).

13. Hall P. A. (2014). Varieties of Capitalism and the Euro Crisis. West European Politics, no. 37 (6), pp. 1223–1243.

14. Hall P. A. (2018). Varieties of capitalism in light of the euro crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, no. 25 (1), pp. 7–30.

15. Hall P. A., Gingerich D. W. (2009). Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the political economy: An empirical analysis. British Journal of Political Science, no. 39 (3), pp. 449–482.

16. Hall P., Soskice D. (2001a). An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

17. Hall P., Soskice D. (eds). (2001b). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

18. Hancké B. (2013). Unions, Central Banks, and EMU: Labour market institutions and monetary integration in Europe. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

19. Harvey D. (1981). The spatial fix – Hegel, von Thunen, and Marx. Antipode, no. 13 (3), pp. 1–12.

20. Hicks A., Kenworthy L. (1998). Cooperation and Political Economic Performance in Affluent Democratic Capitalism. American Journal of Sociology, no. 103, pp. 1631–72.

21. Iversen T., Soskice D., Hope A. (2016). The Eurozone and political economic institutions. Annual Review of Political Science, no. 19 (1), pp. 163–185.

22. Johnston A., Hancké B., Pant S. (2016). Comparative institutional advantage in theEuropean sovereign debt crisis. Comparative Political Studies, no. 47 (13), pp. 1771–1800.

23. Katzenstein P. J. (1977). Between power and plenty: Foreign economic policies of advanced industrial states. Madison, University of Wisconsin Press.

24. Lehmbruch G., Schmitter P. C. (eds). (1979). Trends toward corporatist intermediation. Beverly Hills, Sage Publications.

25. Massey, D. (1995). Spatial divisions of labour: Social structures and the geography of production. London, Macmillan Press.

26. Nölke A., Vliegenthart A. (2009). Enlarging the varieties of capitalism: The emergence of dependent

27. market economies in East Central Europe. World politics, no.61 (4), pp. 670–702.

28. Piore M. J., Sabel C. F. (1984). The Second Industrial Divide: Conditions for Prosperity.

29. Rostow W. W. (1960). The Stages of Economic Growth: A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge University Press.

30. Scott A. J. (1988). New industrial spaces: Flexible production organization and regional development in North America and Western Europe. Vol. 3. London, Pion Ltd.

31. Shonfield A. (1965). Modern Capitalism. New York, Oxford University Press.

32. Whitley R. (1999). Divergent capitalisms: The social structuring and change of business systems. New York, OUP Oxford.

33. Workers of the world, log on! (2018). The Economist, November 17.


Review

For citations:


Lobanov M.M., Glinkina S.P. Problems of the Evolution of the Comparative Capitalism Theory from the mid‑20th Century (On the Example of the Developed Countries). Economics of Contemporary Russia. 2019;(4):7-20. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2019-4(87)-7-20

Views: 957


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1609-1442 (Print)
ISSN 2618-8996 (Online)