Washington Consensus, Neo-Liberalism and Beyond: Does Beijing Consensus Break the Routine?
Öz
The Bretton-Woods institutions which were established after the Second World War and the neo-liberal policies adopted in 1980s known as the Washington Consensus were exposed to significant critics after the 2008 global financial crisis. Even though the Washington Consensus and the policies implemented have increased the profitability, they caused serious problems such as crises, disruptions in income distribution and inequalities. This than, led to the persistence of underdevelopment. In contrast to these policies, China and other Asian countries, following an alternative policy mix which is based on intensive intervention of government, have achieved extremely rapid growth rates and industrialization with a more equal income distribution. The validity and impacts of the Chinese model, which later called the Beijing Consensus, for emerging and middle income economies are still debated. The main aim of the study is to compare the Washington Consensus with Beijing Consensus within the context of emerging and middle income economies. The study also discusses the possible returns and future of Beijing Consensus.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Aburaki, K. 2013. China’s Competitiveness Myth, Reality, and Lessons for the United States and Japan. Washington DC: Center for Strategic & International Studies.
- Akyüz, Y. 2011. “Export Dependence and Sustainability of Growth in China”. China & World Economy, 19(1): 1-23.
- Arifin, B. (2017). The Failure of the Washington Consensus, the Need for a New Reform and the Rise of the Beijing Consensus. AEGIS: Journal of International Relations, 1(2), 118-130.
- Arısoy, E., Bayar, G., & Soranlar, B. 2004. “Asya’nın Devi: Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti”. [In Turkish]. Dış Ticaret Dergisi, 32: 1-17.
- Atkinson, A. B., Hasell, J., Morelli, S., & Roser, M. 2018. “The Chartbook of Economic Inequality”. Retrieved December 9, 2018, from https://www.chartbookofeconomicinequality.com.
- Bakir, E., & Campbell, A. 2016. “Kalecki and the Determinants of the Profit Rate in the United States”. Review of Radical Political Economics, 48(4), 577–587.
- Birdsall, N. 2012. “The Global Financial Crisis the Beginning of the End of the “Development” Agenda?”. Center for Global Development (CGD) Policy Paper 003.
- Breslin, S. 2018. “Fitting China into the Debate”. In Revisiting the developmental state. (7-8) SPERI Paper no. 43.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
İngilizce
Konular
-
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
Mehmet Ozan Saray
*
Türkiye
Yayımlanma Tarihi
31 Temmuz 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi
14 Mart 2019
Kabul Tarihi
2 Temmuz 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2019 Cilt: 14 Sayı: 55