State-Directed Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the Global PeripheryThe study undertakes a comparative analysis of the state as an economic actor in developing countries. Why have some developing country states been more successful at facilitating industrialization than others? An answer to this question is developed by focusing both on patterns of state construction and patterns of state intervention aimed at promoting industrialization. Four countries are analyzed in detail - South Korea, Brazil, India, and Nigeria - over the twentieth century. The states in these countries varied from cohesive-capitalist (mainly in Korea), through fragmented-multiclass (mainly in India), to neo-patrimonial (mainly in Nigeria). It is argued that cohesive-capitalist states have been most effective at promoting industrialization and neo-patrimonial states the least. The performance of fragmented-multiclass states falls somewhere in the middle. After explaining in detail as to why this should be so, the study traces the origins of these different state types historically, emphasizing the role of different types of colonialisms in the process of state construction in the developing world. |
Contents
The Colonial Origins of a Modern Political Economy The Japanese Lineage of Koreas CohesiveCapitalist State | 27 |
The Rhee Interregnum Saving South Korea for Cohesive Capitalism | 62 |
A CohesiveCapitalist State Reimposed Park Chung Hee and Rapid Industrialization | 84 |
TWO STEPS FORWARD ONE STEP BACK Brazil | 125 |
Invited Dependency Fragmented State and Foreign Resources in Brazils Early Industrialization | 127 |
Grow Now Pay Later State and Indebted Industrialization in Modern Brazil | 169 |
SLOW BUT STEADY India | 219 |
Origins of a FragmentedMulticlass State and a Sluggish Economy Colonial India | 221 |
Indias FragmentedMulticlass State and Protected Industrialization | 257 |
DASHED EXPECTATIONS Nigeria | 289 |
Colonial Nigeria Origins of a Neopatrimonial State and a CommodityExporting Economy | 291 |
Sovereign Nigeria Neopatrimonialism and Failure of Industrialization | 329 |
Understanding States and State Intervention in the Global Periphery | 367 |
| 427 | |
| 447 | |
Other editions - View all
State-Directed Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the ... Atul Kohli Limited preview - 2004 |
State-Directed Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the ... Atul Kohli No preview available - 2004 |
Common terms and phrases
Africa agrarian agricultural authoritarian Brazil Brazilian British bureaucracy Cambridge University Press capacity capital central chaebols chap civil service coffee cohesive-capitalist created democracy developing countries developing world developmental early economic development economic growth Economy of Nigeria elites emerged entrepreneurs especially Estado Novo example exports facilitate factors force foreign investors fragmented fragmented-multiclass goals grew groups growing History Ibid impact import substitution India indigenous Indira Gandhi industrial growth institutions intervention investment Japan Japanese colonial labor laissez-faire leaders limited mainly manufacturing military rulers mobilize modern multiclass nationalist movement neopatrimonial Nigeria nomic numerous old republic Park Chung Hee pattern period political economy Princeton production promote public sector rapid industrialization rates regime regional relatively revenues Rhee role rule São Paulo Second World War Seoul significant social society Sokoto Caliphate South Korea state-led state's statism strategy tariffs taxes textiles tion trade Vargas Yoruba