İKTİSADİ KALKINMADA DEVLET-PİYASA NİSPİ ROLLERİNE İLİŞKİN TARTIŞMALARA “WASHINGTON-SONRASI KONSENSÜS” SON NOKTAYI KOYDU MU?

Yıl 2005, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 325 - 341, 18.02.2010

Ali Şen

Öz

Yapısalcı, neoklasik ve revizyonist kalkınmacı devlet
yaklaşımlarından sonra, neoliberal dönemin paradigması olan
Washington Konsensüs (WK), kalkınma yardımı yapan uluslararası
finansal kuruluşların gelişmekte olan ülkelere (GOÜ) önerdiği “piyasa
dostu” bir reçete olmuştur. Ancak, GOÜ’lerin neoliberal politikalarla
olan deneyimleri krizlerle sonuçlanınca, Washington-Sonrası Konsensüs
(WSK) devlet ve piyasa faktörlerinin performansını daha iyi bir düzeye
çıkarmaya çalışan yeni neoliberal ekonomi politikaları seti olarak ortaya
çıktı. Bu çalışmanın amacı, iktisadi kalkınma sürecinde devlet-piyasa
rollerini incelemek ve bunu özellikle WK ve WSK paradigmaları
çerçevesinde tartışmaktır. Bu makale, WSK’nın devlet-piyasa
bağlamında WK’ya göre oldukça önemli ilerlemeler sağladığını kabul
etmekle beraber, onun bazı sınırlama ve açmazlarına da işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İktisadi kalkınma, gelişmekte olan ülkeler

Kaynakça

• Ahrens, J. (2000). “Toward a Post-Washington Consensus: The Importance of Governance Structures in Less Developed Countries and Economies in Transition”,Erişim:http://www.sigov.si/zmar/apublic/jiidt/iib0400/08- ahren.pdf, 7.06.2004.
• Amsden, A. (1989). Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Balaam, David N. and M. Veseth. (2001) Introduction to International Political Economy, 2nd Edition, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc, Upper Saddle River.
• Bhagwati, Jagdish N. (1982). Directly Unproductive, Profit-Seeking (DUP) Activities Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 90, No. 5 Oct, ss.988-1002
• Chanda, N. (1998) “Rebuilding Asia” Far Eastern Economic Review, 12 February, ss.46-50.
• Fischer, S. (2003). “Globalization and its Challanges”, Richard T. Ely Lecture, American Economic Association, Papers and Proceedings, May, 1-38.
• Gilpin, R. (2001). Global Political Economy . Princeton University Press, Princeton.
• Gore, C. (2000), “The Rise and Fall of the Washington Consensus as a Paradigm for Developing Countries”, World Development, 28, 5, ss.789- 804.
• Hayami, Y. (2003). “From the Washington Consensus to the Post-Washington Consensus: Retrospect and Prospect” Asia Development Review 20, 2. ss. 40-65
• Hirshman, A.O. (1968). “The Political Economy of Import Substituting Industrialisation in Latin America” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82, 1, February. ss.1-32.
• Johnson, C. (1982). MITI and the Japanese Miracle: Growth of Industrialization Policy, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
• Krueger, A. O., (1974), “The Political Economy of the Rent-Seeking Society,” The American Economic Review, 64, ss.291-303.
• Krugman, P. (1990) The Age of Diminished Expectations. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
• Kolodko, G.W. (1999). “Transition to a Market Economy and Sustained Growth. Implications for the Post-washington Consensus” Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 32, ss.233-261.
• Myrdal, G. (1957). Economic Theory and Underdeveloped Regions. Duckworth, London.
• Nurkse, R. (1961). Equilibrium and Growth in the World Economy: Economic Essays, Harward University Press, Cambridge.
• Öniş, Z. (1995). “The Limits of Neoliberalism: Toward a Reformulation of Development Theory”, Journal of Economic Issues, 29, 1, ss. 97-119.
• _______, (1999). State and Market, 2. Edition. Boğaziçi University Press, Istanbul.
• Öniş, Z ve F. Şenses. (2004). "Rethinking the Emerging Post-Washington Consensus: A Critical Appraisal
• Phillips, N and R. Higgott. (1999). “Global Governance and the Public Domain: Collective Goods in a Post-Washington Consensus Era” CSGR, University of Warwick, Working Paper. No. 47/99 Erişim:http://www.csgr.org, 11.12.2004.
• Prebish, R. (1959). “Commercial Policy in the Underdeveloped Countries.” American Economic Review. Papers and Proceedings. Vol. XLIX, May, 2: 251-278
• Rigg, J. (2002) “Of Miracles and Crises: Re-interpretatiion of growth and decline in East and Southeast Asia” Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 43, 2 (August): ss.137-156
• Rodrik, D. (1997). Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Institute of International Economics, Washington, D.C.
• _______, (1999). Making Openness Work: The New Global Economy and the Developing Countries. Overseas Development Council, Washington, DC.
• Singer, M. (1950). “The Distribution of Gains Between Investing and Borrowing Countries. American Economic Review. Papers and Proceedings. Vol.XL., May: 473-481.
• Stiglitz, J. (1998). More Instruments and Broader Goals: Moving Toward the Post-Washington Consensus, The 1998 WIDER Annual Lecture, Helsinki.
• _______, (2001). “An Agenda for Development for the Twenty-First Century” A. Giddens (der.) The Global Third Way Debate, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK, ss. 340-357.
• _______,. (2002). Küreselleşme: Büyük Hayal Kırıklığı (Çev. A. Taşçıoğlu ve D. Vural), Plan B, İstanbul.
• Tollison, R. D., (1982), “Rent-Seeking: A Survey,” Kyklos, 35, ss.575-602.
• Tullock, G. (1967). Welfare Costs of Tariffs, Monopolies and Theft. Western Economic Journal 5 (June), ss. 224–232.
• Wade, R. (1990). Governing the Market: Econmic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization. University Press, Princeton
• Williamson J. (2000). “What Should the World Bank Think about the Washington Consensus?” The World Bank Research Observer, 15, 2 (August), ss. 251–64.
• _______, (2002). “Did the Washington Consensus Fail?” Outline of Remarks at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. 6 Kasım 2002 World Bank (2000). World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty, OUP, Oxford.
• http://home.ku.edu.tr/~zonis/OnisZiyaandSensesFikret-Post-Washington Consensus.pdf, 27.06.2004.
• http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/williamson1102.htm 11.01.2004.