Search

Since the 1980s, inequality has been rising in Europe, North America and parts of Asia. How does our understanding of global inequality dynamics change if coverage is extended to the rest of the developing world? To rebalance the perspective on global inequality trends, this paper surveys data and literature on recent inequality trends in Latin America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. It finds that in these regions there are more countries with falling than rising inequality over the past 20 years, as measured by Ginis of income or consumption inequality. At the global level, therefore, there are signs of inequality convergence, as inequality has been falling in countries with high inequality in the 1990s (particularly Latin America), and rising in historically low-inequality countries. We discuss the political and economic drivers of inequality decline in countries with a steady fall in the Gini. This suggests some common trends across the globe, including the role of democratisation, the rise of new social movements, and the expansion of education and social safety nets and favourable commodity prices, in reducing income disparities. This paper calls for more country-level comparisons of inequality trends, to highlight the multiplicity of paths in this latest phase of globalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that to understand the relevance of developmental states in East Asia and elsewhere, we need to focus on the changing development agenda in the early twenty-first century, especially how this connects with the global challenge of climate change and thereby sustainable, low-carbon development. It combines theories on state capacity and ecological modernisation to form the 'new developmentalism' concept. This is applied to study revitalised and refocused forms of state capacity aimed at realising the transformative economic objectives associated with sustainable development. New developmentalism helps us understand not only current state capacity practice in a climate challenged world but also how we have moved beyond original conceptions of developmental statism. It may be understood in the wider context of the sustainable development agenda and climate interventionism. As is argued, new developmentalism is most clearly evident in East Asia but can be applied in a wider geographic sense where strong forms of developmental state capacity are exercised towards meeting transformative sustainable development goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the Chinese government’s ‘belt and road’ initiative – the Silk Roads vision of land and maritime logistics and communications networks connecting Asia, Europe and Africa – has its roots in sub-national ideas and practices, and that it reflects their elevation to the national level more than the creation of substantially new policy content. Further, the spatial paradigms inherent in the Silk Roads vision reveal the reproduction of capitalist developmental ideas expressed particularly in the form of networks, which themselves have become a feature of contemporary global political economy. In other words, the Silk Roads vision is more of a ‘spatial fix’ than a geopolitical manoeuvre. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The 1997-98 Pacific Asian crises have left most established interpretations of the region's long-term growth in serious disarray. This paper begins the task of reinterpreting Pacific Asian economic growth through, in particular, an examination of the Thai experience. It is argued that, while Thailand's growth from the early 1960s was associated with the least interventionist state in Pacific Asia, by international standards there were high levels of price distortion. From the late 1970s changed circumstances reduced both the level and, more significantly, the effectiveness of the Thai developmental state. These developments, while playing a role in the sustaining of the Kingdom's rapid growth and structural change during the period 1986-96 also made the Kingdom extremely vulnerable to financial disruption. It is suggested that the Thai situation has wider application in seeking to understand Pacific Asian growth in general and the 1997-98 crisis in particular. This leads to a questioning of the IMF neoliberal-based interpretations of Pacific Asian growth and the prescriptions for dealing with the crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]