Neostructuralism (economic theory)
Neostructuralism is an approach to development economics that emerged in 1990 . In Latin America, it has replaced the neoliberal approach that had prevailed since the 1980s in the sense of the Washington Consensus as the predominant development economics approach.
history
The content-related forerunner of neostructuralism was structuralism . Structural economic policy was largely promoted by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean CEPAL . Structuralism was dominant from the 1960s to the mid-1980s.
The structuralist economic policy was replaced in the 1980s by a phase of economic policy based on the Washington Consensus , which lasted until around the year 2000 . The economic policy also propagated by the World Bank was seen as a “neoliberal” inspired policy imposed on the South American countries from abroad. It resulted in below-average economic growth compared to earlier phases and proved to be very unpopular with the population.
Since the mid-1980s, Fernando Fajnzylber, an intellectual pioneer of neostructuralism , urged the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean ( CEPAL ) to adopt a new development strategy. The publication of the influential publication Transformación Productiva con Equidad (economic structural change and social equality) in 1989 is considered to be the birth of neostructuralism . Starting with the election of Ricardo Lagos in Chile (2000), a number of center-left governments were elected in Latin America, which passed to the economic policy of neo-structuralism.
Demarcation
The following table by Fernando Ignacio Leiva compares the economic policy paradigms of structuralism , neoliberalism in the sense of the Washington Consensus and neostructuralism:
| Paradigms | Structuralism (1950–1970) | Neoliberalism in the sense of the Washington Consensus (1973 to today) | Neostructuralism (1990 to today) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motto | Structural change | Structural adjustment | Productivity-enhancing transformation and social justice |
| target | Modernization through industrialization | Modernization through privatization | Modernization through globalization |
| Development policy | Political will, state intervention rationalized through the planning process | Spontaneous result of the efforts of market participants, driven by the free price allocation mechanism | A well thought-out process in which the state and society concentrate their forces on a dynamic contribution to world trade |
| Initiator of the development | Country | market | Technical progress through dynamic incorporation into world trade |
| Obstacles | World trade reproduces the center-periphery asymmetries. Historically grown structures deform the market process. | State intervention stifles private initiative and shackles the allocation mechanism of the market. Overvalued currencies make export opportunities worse. | In developing and emerging countries, uncoordinated market mechanisms mean that competitiveness is sought more through low wages and currency devaluations than through productivity and innovation progress. |
| tasks of the state | Reform structures, manage capital accumulation, develop key industries. | Guarantee the minimum requirements for the functioning of the market (enforce contracts, protect property, etc.), reduce the social network. | Promote competitiveness on the world market (cluster, public-private partnership). Promote adaptability and skills of workers. Strengthen social cohesion. |
| Social conflict | The state absorbs the pressure of social groups. | Repression of the trade unions. Trust in the trickle-down effect . Cut subsidies. | Channeling social conflicts or subordinating them to the goal of bringing them into world trade. |
| result | The economy is subordinate to politics. | Politics is subordinate to economy. | Politics and culture have to be adapted to the demands of globalization. |
Web links
- Lucimara Braite-Poplawski: Similarities and Differences Between Neostructuralism and Older Structuralism ( Memento from May 28, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
- Andreas Steiner: The CEPAL concept for development in Latin America at the end of our century: Neostructuralism
- Claudio Maggi, Dirk Messner: Fernando Fajnzylber (1940–1991). Authentic competitiveness through institutional reforms
Individual evidence
- ^ Fernando Ignacio Leiva: Toward a Critique of Latin American Neostructuralism. In: William C. Smith, Laura Gomez-Mera: Market, State, and Society in Contemporary Latin America , Blackwell Publ., 2010, ISBN 978-1444335255 , page 33
- ^ Joseph L. Love: The Rise and Decline of Economic Structuralism in Latin America. In: Latin American Research Review. Vol. 40 No. 3 (2005), pp. 100-125. P. 100.
- ^ Joseph L. Love: The Rise and Decline of Economic Structuralism in Latin America. In: Latin American Research Review. Vol. 40 No. 3 (2005), pp. 100–125, here: p. 107.
- ^ Justin Yifu Lin, New Structural Economics, A Framework For Rethinking Development . (PDF; 345 kB) page 10
- ↑ Fernando Ignacio Leiva, Latin American Neostructuralism: The Contradictions of Post-Neoliberal Development , University of Minnesota Press, 2008, ISBN 978-0816653287 , p. 4
- ↑ Fernando Ignacio Leiva, Toward a Critique of Latin American Neostructuralism in: William C. Smith, Laura Gomez-Mera, Market, State, and Society in Contemporary Latin America , Blackwell Publ., 2010, ISBN 978-1444335255 , page 33
- ↑ Fernando Ignacio Leiva, Toward a Critique of Latin American Neostructuralism in: William C. Smith, Laura Gomez-Mera, Market, State, and Society in Contemporary Latin America , Blackwell Publ., 2010, ISBN 978-1444335255 , page 35