Journal of Economic Geography · 2013 · 343 citations · 113 references
Social SciencesEconomicsPolitical ScienceEconomic GeographyEconomic SociologyPolitical EconomyAsian EconomiesComparative Political EconomyCapitalist Ideology CritiqueChinese EconomyChinese NationalismMutual DependenceRegional Economic Performance
The varieties of capitalism framework is a key methodological innovation in comparative political economy that explains spatial differences in national performance through macroinstitutional analysis, contrasting liberal market economies (USA) with coordinated market economies (Germany), but has been critiqued for methodological nationalism, limited institutional registers, rational‑choice focus, and neglect of interpenetration among capitalist economies. The article aims to determine whether the Chinese economy can be meaningfully described as capitalist, examining its state form, recent development path, and its place within or beyond conventional capitalist varieties. The authors critically analyze the Chinese case using the varieties of capitalism framework, evaluating institutional features and economic trajectories to assess its capitalist character.
The 'varieties of capitalism' framework represents an influential methodological innovation in the field of comparative political economy. It seeks to account for enduring spatial variations in national economic performance by recourse to macroinstitutional analysis, drawing ideal-type distinctions between liberal market economies, modeled on USA, and coordinated market economies, modeled on Germany. Moving beyond critiques of varieties literature—for instance, its methodological nationalism; its preoccupation with limited, formal registers of (national) institutional variety; its growing reliance on rational-choice, firm-centric methods; its failure to account for the pronounced interpenetration and mutual dependence of capitalist economies and its tendency to privilege typological elaboration over causal explanation—this article explores the critical (counter?) case of Chinese capitalism. It considers the extent to which the Chinese economy can be meaningfully characterized as capitalist; the character of its state form and recent development path and its position within—or beyond—conventional understandings of capitalist variety.
113
Embedded autonomy: states and industrial transformation
Choice Reviews Online · 1995 · 3.7K citations
Engineering, Industrial Engineering, Systems Engineering +12
The Fundamental Institutions of China's Reforms and Development
Chenggang Xu · Journal of Economic Literature · 2011 · 2.6K citations · Full text
MITI and the Japanese Miracle. The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925—1975
Kent E. Calder · Pacific Affairs · 1983 · 2.2K citations
Social Sciences, Economics, History +17