Search

The portrayals of "new state capitalism" in both the popular media and policy-making circles have become a potent geopolitical category. This politically realist categorization is understandably popular because of its simplicity—states proactively participating in capital accumulation are construed as threats to institutions underpinning the "free market". This paper complicates this portrayal by framing what appears to be a "rise" of state capitalistic maneuvers from China as a dynamic sovereignty–accumulation nexus. Specifically, Chinese state capitalism—and arguably state capitalism in general—constitutes the reproduction of sovereign rule. Underpinning this tension-filled process is territoriality: the use of territory for political, economic, and social ends. This dynamic relationship will be illustrated through an examination of how and why Yunnan, a southwestern Chinese province that was economically marginalized for several decades, emerged as a geostrategic platform for facilitating new rounds of capital accumulation. Through large-scale infrastructural investments in Yunnan, the Chinese state generated new territorial configurations that (a) enabled the positioning of Yunnan as a "bridgehead" of Chinese economic statecraft and (b) encouraged investments aimed at capturing new growth opportunities. While this state-led developmental process partially resolves tensions generated by previous rounds of capital accumulation, it also generates new tensions. Building on this case study, the paper demonstrates how Chinese state capitalism more accurately exemplifies a state-building process that is embedded in and is constituted by a central contradiction between the territorial and capitalistic logics of power. It concludes by presenting two directions for future research on Chinese state capitalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article critically assesses state–market relations through a comparative firm-level study of state-led development in the China–Myanmar border region. It develops a framework that foregrounds how market building is a contingent and multi-scalar process that underpins the reproduction of stable state rule. The framework is utilized to examine state-led attempts in Ruili, a border city in Yunnan province, to attract Yinxiang, a privately owned firm, and Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Corporation (BAIC), a state-owned enterprise (SOEs), to launch flagship manufacturing projects. The contrasting performance of these firms—Yinxiang successfully captured its target market in Myanmar while BAIC did not even commence production—foregrounds a pronounced tension in the ongoing market reforms. On the one hand, attempts at giving market actors more autonomy in resource allocation through supply-side structural reforms continue to be shaped by the institutional legacy of reciprocal accountability. On the other hand, the Chinese state's willingness to allow BAIC's investment to fail suggests it is serious about subjecting both local governments and SOEs to demand-side discipline. These findings collectively generate one distinct contribution to existing research on state–market relations: market activities are embedded within state-building processes in place-specific and often unpredictable ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cutting-edge research on geoeconomics has under-explored one core constituent – the firm. Presenting two empirical ‘snapshots’ from different historical-geographical conjunctures, this essay spotlights the continuities that underpin firms’ function as geoeconomic actors. The first conjuncture is the expansion of British geoeconomic influence through the East India Company. The US government’s ongoing attempt to curtail attempts by China-based firms to develop high performance semiconductor chips comprises the second conjuncture. While each snapshot is distinct, the logics from the first conjuncture can be utilised for understanding how firms’ operating logics impact on state-driven geoeconomic strategies during the second conjuncture. These snapshots collectively demonstrate how the evolution of transnational economic integration has been underpinned by proactive firm attempts at expanding foreign operations. The effects of these attempts on states’ geoeconomic objectives will subsequently trigger positive or negative interventions by state actors. A new ‘critical geoeconomics’ agenda must therefore consider how firms constitute and/or constrain geoeconomic influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on the strategic coupling between regions and global lead firms has largely assumed that the regional assets for coupling are ready made and are largely unchanging throughout the coupling process. This article takes this assumption as its critical point of departure and presents a new framework that considers how regional assets are actively (re)configured across multiple scales in ways that could redefine the prevailing mode of strategic coupling. The empirical basis of this framework is derived from a long-term case study on the formation and evolution of Sino-German production networks in environmental goods and services (EGS) in Jieyang, a relatively peripheral city in Guangdong province in China. The analysis draws from thirty-three interviews and seven focus group discussions, conducted between 2014 and 2020, with nonstate and state actors in Jieyang. Findings highlight how Zhongde, a coalition of Jieyang-based firms, transcended the limitations of structural coupling, which exemplifies uneven power relations between regions and lead firms, and attained more balanced coupling relations with German-led EGS global production networks (GPNs) through realigning interests with those of national-level institutions. Responding positively to the structural constraints and opportunities within a Chinese state structure based on experimental governance, Zhongde connected German EGS lead firms to the highly profitable but protected EGS market in China. This ability to jump between scales underscores the cross-scalar and dynamic aspects of strategic coupling: Zhongde was able to meet German-led EGS GPNs' demand for market access and enhanced localization economies through reconfiguring regional assets. Abstracting from these findings, the article enhances the explanation of the evolution of strategic coupling by conceptualizing its intrinsic dynamism and incorporating state structural effects. Finally, it presents two directions for further research on GPN reconfigurations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade, the Chinese state has launched a strategic opium substitution program to support agricultural firms in Yunnan province to invest in northern Myanmar, which is second only to Afghanistan in drug production. These Yunnanese firms are encouraged to collaborate with or hire ex-poppy farmers to plant rubber, sugarcane, tea, corn, and other crops so that these farmers can leave the drug economy successfully. This paper examines the context and challenges of this program through a framework that highlights the tensions between geopolitics and geoeconomics. At one level, the framework demonstrates how the geopolitics–geoeconomics relationship is reinforced by reciprocal control: the promise of monetary profits has become a strategic tool for the Chinese state to implement narcotics control in northern Myanmar. At another level, however, reciprocity is manifested unevenly as not all private producers respond to this strategy in a positive and engaged manner. This unevenness inevitably generates regulatory tensions at multiple scales and underscores, in turn, how border security remains intrinsically unstable vis-a-vis attempts at geoeconomic integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper foregrounds and evaluates the research design associated with the study of Chinese state rescaling. It first synthesizes the existing gaps in the original, Western-based state rescaling framework. It then explores how different methodological channels are integrated to support a revised analytical framework. Specifically, it presents the value of multi-sited comparisons through (1) the ‘extended case method’ and (2) the ‘concurrent nested strategy’. In so doing, the paper offers a systematic assessment of the methodological contributions and constraints in ascertaining and explaining how regulatory reconfigurations unfold across space and time in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]