Mercantilism and the Struggle for Late Industrialization in an Age of Globalization

Abstract

The last few decades have witnessed a spirited debate over globalization and the real or perceived impact of global economic integration on the performance of national economies (Weiss, 1998; 1999; Rodrik, 2001; Chang, 2007). The debate appeared, for a time, to be polarized between the theorists of global market integration (eg Ohmae, 1995; Dollar, 2001) and those that are critical of the globalization orthodoxy (Weiss, 1998; Rodrik, 1999; Chang, 2002; Amsden, 2005). The former group celebrated the convergence of different species of capitalism on the Anglo-American norm of “free trade”; the latter underscored cross-national variations in capitalist development. One group announced the rise of the “borderless world” signifying the sovereignty of private capital over sovereign states; the other documented the enduring significance of nation-states in the “global” political economy. One team celebrated the “death” of industrial policy; the other appreciated the changing, but not ending, significance of industrial policy (Rodrik, 2004; Chang, 2007).