China's Post-Listian Rise: Beyond Radical Globalisation Theory and the Political Economy of Neoliberal Hegemony

While China's rise has been much discussed, its meaning continues to be contested. This is true in radical international political economy, where, for example, it was the subject of (often polarised) debates between Giovanni Arrighi and David Harvey prior to Arrighi's death in 2009. This reflected a broader debate in IPE between development theory and radical globalisation analysis. The key point of contention is whether China's rise represents a challenge to or further consolidation of neoliberal hegemony on a global scale. This article critically scrutinises some of the key assumptions of the radical globalisation approach, specifically, that China represents another form of the ‘competition state’ whose development aspirations have been radically constrained by global ‘new constitutionalism’ and American monetary power so as to conform to neoliberalism. Deploying a structurationist approach to global governance and an eclectic/regulatory analysis of the Chinese state, I argue that China has challenged neoliberalism by projecting its growing power through constitutionalised global governance. In the face of (declining) American power, global constitutionalism has provided an opportunity structure that may help China consolidate its long-term strategy of consensual development. Far from anchoring ‘neoliberal hegemony’, global economic governance is increasingly central to its unravelling.     

From Receding to Reseeding: Industrial Policy,Governance Strategies and Neoliberal Resilience in Post-crisis Britain

ABSTRACT

Industrial policy has been on the agenda of British policy elites since the 2008 financial crisis, particularly since Theresa May became Prime Minister in 2016. This has been seen as a challenge to pre-crisis norms of economic governance associated with neoliberalism. This article explores key aspects of industrial policy development in post-crisis Britain – new forms of vertical support for industry, local government reform, and the public financing of private sector R&D – in order to sketch a new understanding of political and ideological change. It focuses on the institutional mechanisms through which industrial strategy will ostensibly be implemented, including subnational and private spheres of governance. The article argues that recent industrial policy developments do not represent the receding of neoliberalism, but rather have provided opportunities for the reseeding of neoliberal norms in British economic statecraft. The strategy has reinforced forms of state machinery through which pre-crisis elite practice can be maintained and legitimated. By demonstrating that the apparent revival of state intervention in the wake of capitalist crises must not be assumed automatically to challenge pre-crisis economic orders, and highlighting the crucial role of exigent political circumstances, the article makes an important contribution to the literature on neoliberal resilience.     

Neoliberal Entrenchment of North Atlantic Capital. From Corporate Self-Regulation to State Capture

After the financial crisis of 2007–8, neoliberal capitalism by all appearances has entrenched instead of being displaced. Its political–economic programme or ‘comprehensive concept of control’ continues to hold society in thrall. This was different in the crisis of 1974–5 when the corporate liberalism of the postwar years and its industry-centred class compromise were beginning to be replaced by finance-led neoliberalism and a compromise with asset-owning middle classes. Under corporate liberalism, real capital accumulation was protected from the ‘rentier’/‘money-dealing’ fraction of capital associated with speculative investment; neoliberalism has allowed its resurgence. Large corporations in the first phase of the transition (‘systemic neoliberalism’) embarked on a strategy of transnational restructuring no longer dependent on 1960s-style state support. In the process, financial group formation, here measured by dense director interlocks (≥2) amongst the largest corporations in the North Atlantic economy (where this type of corporate governance obtains), was intensified. The resurgence of money-dealing capital and rentier incomes in the 1990s led to a decline in real accumulation (‘predatory neoliberalism’), and after the crisis of 2007–8, to a demise of the financial group structure of Atlantic capital as the network of dense interlocks radically thins out and capital comes to rely on states again, this time to protect it from a democratic correction of the neoliberal regime and with state autonomy greatly reduced by public debt.     

‘Conscience Capitalism’ and the Neoliberalisation of the Non-Profit Sector

This article analyses a range of initiatives, labelled as ‘conscience capitalist’, that have become prominent since the 2008 financial crash. Conscience capitalism encompasses projects emerging in both the for- and non-profit sectors that seek to connect neoliberal capitalism with concepts of morality and conscience. The article begins by unpacking conscience capitalism, showing how its for-profit advocates seek to transform capitalism by orienting it towards accounting for social and environmental externalities, and how its non-profit supporters seek to incorporate components of neoliberalism to serve their environmentally and/or socially focused agendas. Conscience capitalism appears to be a re-evaluation and call for reform of the prominent forms of neoliberalism. However, this article argues that, rather than comprising a hindrance, conscience capitalism offers a means of advancing the project. This is evident in its attempts to reconstitute social and environmental externalities in terms relatable to the market, and represent social and environmental problems in quantitative terms in which the success of market-based solutions can be read. Acknowledging some of the successes of conscience capitalist campaigns, the article concludes by arguing that this continued neoliberalisation of the non-profit sector favours campaigns consistent with neoliberalism and has the potential to undermine the democratic governance of non-profits.     

Governing stigmatised space: the case of the ‘slums’ of Berlin-Neukölln

Spatial stigmatisation – naming spaces with high concentration of poverty as a slum or ghetto – has been well covered in the critical urban geography and sociological debates. Yet, these discussions have neglected to theorise the intersection between the production of stigmatised space and the governance of its inhabitants within the context of one of Germany’s most stigmatised boroughs. By situating Berlin-Neukölln within historical processes of capital accumulation, I show how the discursive, institutional and material practices of neoliberal social policies have played a central, albeit contradictory, role in (re-)producing stigmatise spaces and subjects along racialised, gendered and class lines. This is particularly evident with regard to neoliberal governance strategies that employ and apply the power of public money to repress and integrate impoverished workers into contemporary capitalist society, or what I refer to as the ‘monetisation of socio-spatial reproduction’.     

Thinking Like a Trader: The Impact of Neoliberal Doctrine on Habits of Thought

Neoliberalism has come out of the financial crisis unscathed. Moreover, it has further asserted its dominance over geopolitical discourse and ideology worldwide. I contend that neoliberal supremacy in the policy arena and upon domestic and international institutions has been largely uncontested because it has penetrated all aspects of life to the extent that it now represents what Thorstein Veblen referred to as “the modern point of view.” Understanding the global power of neoliberalism requires examining not only its well-established hegemony over institutions as social constructs, but also its impact on habits of thought as mental constructs. From a Veblenian perspective, I argue that the neoliberal doctrine generates habits of thought which legitimize the transformation of a marketoriented economy into a full-fledged market society. The impact of the normalization of the neoliberal mode of behavior may, in the end, worsen the fracture between nation and state and unravel the fabric of society by justifying fully detached, emotion-free, and self-centered actions that crowd-out pro-social behaviors and challenge any social conception of the common good.     

Knowledge at work: Some neoliberal anachronisms

With a predilection for market solutions, neoliberalism upholds that the individual is generally the best judge of his or her interests. Yet markets are never universally applied as a mechanism of allocation and there are reasons, in principle, why capitalism will always have “missing markets.” Concentrating on the application and appropriateness of neoliberal theory to the workplace, this article argues that firms are not markets, despite some tendencies in modern theory to conflate the two. The employment contract is a key characteristic of modern firms, but neoliberal theory is often silent on the distinction between an employment contract and a contract for services, and largely ignores the asymmetrical rights of authority within contracts of employment. Furthermore, the social nature of knowledge represents a challenge to neoliberal theory and policy, because it sometimes makes it more difficult to define individual property rights. Accordingly, with the growth of the knowledge economy, neoliberalism to some extent is an anachronism.     

Failure to Expand? Socio-Technical Practices and Moral Judgement in Markets for Biodiversity Offsets

Markets have become an important form of governance in the neoliberal era. The ideology of markets as the most efficient form of organising economic activity has led to the expansion of their usage, both in terms of what is governed by the market, but also in terms of the spaces in which the practices of a given market apply. However, there have been important challenges to market expansion, particularly on political and ethical grounds. This paper analyses how the socio-technical practices of market expansion can be affected by political contestation and individual moral judgements. This is analysed in the context of two markets for biodiversity offsets, in the United States and England. In both cases, regulators attempted to devise and standardise calculative mechanisms and socio-technical practices that promoted the use and expansion of the market. However, these socio-technical market practices have struggled to cross and negotiate uneven political and social spaces, being subject to moral judgements and political contestation. The paper demonstrates how the socio-technical practices of market expansion are affected by social entanglements, highlighting how this creates limits to the expansion of the market as a form of governance.     

Neoliberal and neostructuralist perspectives on labour flexibility,poverty and inequality: A critical appraisal

Numerous recent reports by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), academics and international organisations have focused on so-called ‘climate refugees’. This article examines the turn from a discourse of ‘climate refugees’, in which organisations perceive migration as a failure of both mitigation and adaptation to climate change, to one of ‘climate migration’, in which organisations promote migration as a strategy of adaptation. Its focus is the promotion of climate migration management, and it explores the trend of these discourses through two sections. First, it provides an empirical account of the two discourses, emphasising the differentiation between them. It then focuses on the discourse of climate migration, its origins, extent and content, and the associated practices of ‘migration management’. The second part argues that the turn to the promotion of ‘climate migration’ should be understood as a way to manage the insecurity created by climate change. However, international organisations enacts this management within the forms of neoliberal capitalism, including the framework of governance. Therefore, the promotion of ‘climate migration’ as a strategy of adaptation to climate change is located within the tendencies of neoliberalism and the reconfiguration of southern states' sovereignty through governance.     

开放式创新效能提升的制度基础:关系治理还是契约治理

开放式创新是21世纪以来理论研究和管理实践中的热点问题,然而,值得注意的是,在理论研究蓬勃发展的同时,企业实践并未实现预期效果,甚至失败率很高,这一反差不得不引起人们的反思。以往研究忽视了这样一个事实:开放式创新本质上是一种知识联盟,而联盟治理结构是联盟运行的制度基础,不同治理结构会对联盟决策权、利益格局、激励和冲突等问题产生根本影响。整合社会资本理论和交易成本理论,阐释了不同治理结构对开放式创新绩效的影响机理。运用分层线性模型,利用58家制造企业共398份问卷检验了该模型,研究结果表明:1关系治理与开放式创新绩效呈现倒U型关系;2契约治理对开放式创新绩效有倒U型影响;3在网络化程度较低的情境中,关系治理和契约治理能够相互补充,二者共同使用提升了开放式创新绩效。在网络化程度高的情况下,"软"性的关系治理与"硬"性的契约治理具有明显的替代作用,二者共同使用会显著降低开放式创新绩效,形成"软硬兼施"的负效应。     

The organisation for economic cooperation and development

The global financial and economic crisis has prompted some scholars to suggest that a fundamental regulatory shift away from neoliberalism will take place – both in general and in the field of EU competition regulation. This paper shows that so far no radical break with the neoliberal type of competition regulation is heaving into sight. It sets out to explain this from the vantage point of a critical political economy perspective, which identifies the circumstances under which a crisis can result in a regulatory paradigm shift. Contrasting the current situation with the shift in EC/EU competition regulation after the crisis in the 1970s, the paper argues that the preconditions for a fundamental shift in this issue area are not present this time around. Several reasons account for this: the current crisis has been construed by economic and political elites as a crisis within and not of neoliberal capitalism; the social power configuration underpinning the neoliberal order remains unaltered; no clear counter-project has surfaced; the European Commission has been (and remains) in a position to oppose radical changes; and finally, there are no signs of a wider paradigm shift in the EU's regulatory architecture.     

Neoliberalism as an asocial ideology and strategy in education

There have been many neoliberal education reforms around the world. At the bottom line, those reforms are intended to modify the education system based upon market principles. Reviewing and contrasting various perspectives on education (Adam Smith, Marxists, Veblen, Dewey, and neoclassicists), I argue that: 1) neoliberalism is an asocial ideology of the ruling class in the capitalist system, 2) neoliberalism justifies and propagates market principles in education, 3) there is a discontinuity between classical liberalism and neoliberalism, and 4) when it comes to Korean education reforms, neoliberalism has two contradictions and counter-movements which hinder the realization of market principles in education.     

Thinking Like an Economist: The Neoliberal Politics of the Economics Textbook

This article surveys 10 introductory economics textbooks to examine whether and how economics contributed to the rise of neoliberalism. It defines neoliberalism as a political rationality characterized by market constructivism. In contrast with conventional liberal approaches that view limited government as legitimized by the failure of naturalist markets, neoliberalism constructs the market as norm and means of government. Economics textbooks overall have a liberal outlook, as exemplified by Samuelson's classic, however, with three liberal subgenres: the imperfect market view, the free market view, and an institutionalist view. While the introductory textbook cannot be construed as an instruction manual for neoliberalism, the article nevertheless identifies two important neoliberal moments: the discussion of market-based forms of government and the rise of a new genre of principles textbook that urges students to “think like an economist.” The article concludes with novel insights on how economics may have contributed to the spread of neoliberalism.     

Islamic Charitable Giving in the UK: A ‘Radical’ Economic Alternative?

ABSTRACT

Muslim financial actions have faced increased scrutiny as financial links to ‘terrorism’ have risen in political rhetoric with anything labelled as ‘Islamic’ being perceived to be in requirement of study in terms of its relation to ‘fundamental British values’ (Kundnani, A., 2014. The Muslims Are Coming! Islamaphobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror. London: Verso.). Exploring Muslim charitable giving in the UK, it will be posited that much of Islamic charitable practices sustains a relationship with neoliberalism without being entirely reduced to it. The post-9/11 environment ‘has led to renewed scholarly interest in the relationship between the economy and Islam and more specifically the incorporation of Islamic value in daily economic life’ (Rethel, L., 2019. Corporate Islam, Global Capitalism and the Performance of Economic Moralities. New Political Economy, 24 (3), 350–364, 2). Islamic charitable practices potentially offer a resistance to the inegalitarian effects of neoliberalism whilst simultaneously being both a part, and a consequence of, neoliberal dominance. Moreover, Islamic charity in the UK acts as an expression of the Muslim community against a backdrop of security and surveillance. Thus, while potentially offering a ‘radical’ alternative to neoliberalism it is a non-violent and non-conflictual alternative.     

STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES AS INSTRUMENTS OF INNOVATION POLICY

This article expands the literature on the rationales and governance of state owned enterprises (SOEs). We show that SOEs could be seen as instruments of innovation policies and change agents within broader innovation systems that can overcome many of the conventional challenges of innovation policy and its implementation, from coordination and implementation of policies and innovation system actor networks to financing innovation. We review the existing literature on the rationales of SOEs and extend it to include innovation as a central rationale. Thereafter we provide a taxonomy that reveals the necessary policy and managerial conditions and constraints for using SOEs as instruments of innovation policy. We place some of the better‐known innovation‐oriented SOE successes and failures into this taxonomy and show that this approach will allow in future research to explore different SOE practices and potential for using SOEs as innovation policy instruments across countries.     

‘We All Have a Responsibility to Each Other’: Valuing Racialised Bodies in the Neoliberal Bioeconomy

ABSTRACT

In neoliberalism, human tissue has been targeted as a source for extracting surplus value. Commercial attention on ethnic and racial minorities has resulted in products and services specifically developed for them. Here, we focus on this by exploring two empirical examples: US pharmaceutical clinical trials and UK stem cell transplantation. Both use racial taxonomies to discern biological difference and draw conclusions about the economic potential of people’s genetic constitutions. They do so by appealing to racialised minorities’ sense of responsibility towards ‘their’ communities, both buttressing the conflation of social and biological registers of human variation and demonstrating neoliberalism’s mobilisation of discourses of community. However, while the inclusion of racialised minorities is hoped to bring economic benefits, it also aims to address healthcare inequalities. Drawing on Science and Technology Studies, we argue that in our examples, economic, social and cultural values cannot be disentangled. This compels us to complement narratives of the commodification of racialised difference in neoliberal (consumer) culture, and focus on the intersections between different economic and ethical values. Ultimately we find that whilst work is being done to ameliorate racial inequities, broader socio-economic and political inequalities minority communities face go unaddressed, likely precluding the realisation of health equality.     

The governance of innovative firms: An evolutionary perspective

Corporate governance has been in the recent years one of the most debated issues in conventional economic approaches. Agency theory combined with financial indicators has particularly contributed to the development of shareholder value as a key concept in companies’ governance both at a theoretical and empirical level. We argue that an evolutionary perspective can be developed on the governance of innovative firms since (1) conventional economic approaches only consider a restricted part of this complex issue, and (2) this restricted vision applied in practice has driven the economic system into major coordination problems and turbulences. On the basis of empirical investigations into the telecommunications industry, and guided by a simple model of evolutionary game, we propose new principles of corporate governance centered upon managerial entrepreneurship and its role on innovation and industry dynamics. The outcome is a set of rules of conduct for the manager and the shareholder.     

An Unfortunate Alignment of Heterodoxy,Nationalism, and Authoritarianism in Putin’s Russia

I address the urgent need to deal with the deliberate misuse of heterodox criticism of neoliberal policies in modern Russia. State-funded propaganda has been using distorted institutionalism to rationalize both authoritarianism and nationalism as a left-wing response to global neoliberalism and as a welcome manifestation of civilizational plurality. To help western heterodox-institutionalists offer an informed critique of what Vladimir Putin’s apologists have made of some heterodox ideas, I discuss the particularities of the history of Russian post-Soviet economic thought, and explain who these apologists are and what their training is. I also clarify how, in post-socialist Russia, it has become possible to successfully misappropriate the institutionalist emphases on the significance of culture and history in socio-economic development, and on the active role of the state in a market economy for narrow ideological purposes. In my conclusion, I emphasize strongly that traditional institutionalism is not compatible with oppression and authoritarianism.     

Labor in a Changing America

Nation states having prompted powerful opposition with their claim to be solely responsible for the management of drinking water, the norms controlling governance of this resource have become increasingly fragmented between different normative powers, each defending a distinct "model." To put these models into perspective, it is suggested that the action stratification analysis developed by Giddens (1984) should be used, for it may prove revealing when applied to the question of water services governance. It is capable of demonstrating how the different institutional levels fit together in providing a framework for local practices, stressing the importance of "intersubjectivity" in the process of creating meaning and ultimately underlining the importance of recursive practices in reproducing and transforming the institutions under consideration.     

How do independent directors influence innovation productivity? A quasi-natural experiment

Due to managerial myopia, managers may be reluctant to make long-term investment decisions that do not produce immediate results. Effective corporate governance can align managers’ short-term-oriented incentives with shareholders’ long-term interests. Because the board of directors is the paramount governance mechanism, we explore the role of board governance on managerial myopia. In particular, we investigate the effect of independent directors on corporate innovation. To minimize endogeneity, we exploit the passage of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act as an exogenous shock that raises board independence. Our difference-in-difference estimates show that board independence leads to significantly higher investments in innovation as well as higher innovation productivity. Our results are consequential as they show that board governance has a palpable effect on important corporate outcomes such as innovation productivity.