IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/reorpe/v32y2000i3p461-469.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Markets Like Mushrooms? and Other Neoliberal Quandries

Author

Listed:
  • Mieke Meurs

    (Department of Economics, American University, 4400 Massachusets Ave., N. W., Washington DC 20016 MMeurs@American.edu)

Abstract

The neoliberal Washington Consensus dominated global policy making over the 1980s. Fundamental to this consensus were three theoretical and ideological tenets: that privatization and markets are a natural order and that this order is best achieved if the state economic role is limited. I argue that private property and markets simply cannot be established as neoliberals propose, nor can the state be so easily curtailed. To support this argument, I will draw briefly on examples from the "transition economies." I argue that a more historical understanding of the nature of markets, property, and diverse forms of social organization will allow policy makers to more accurately use these institutions to achieve desired ends. This does not resolve the question of how to define those ends.

Suggested Citation

  • Mieke Meurs, 2000. "Are Markets Like Mushrooms? and Other Neoliberal Quandries," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 461-469, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:reorpe:v:32:y:2000:i:3:p:461-469
    DOI: 10.1177/048661340003200311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/048661340003200311
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/048661340003200311?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trevor Buck & Igor Filatotchev & Mike Wright & Yves van Frausum, 1996. "The Process and Impact of Privatization in Russia and Ukraine," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 38(2-3), pages 45-69, September.
    2. Robert Sugden, 2005. "Spontaneous Order," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Economics of Rights, Co-operation and Welfare, chapter 1, pages 1-9, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Stephen Wegren, 1994. "Rural reform and political culture in Russia," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 215-241.
    4. Hersch, Philip & Kemme, David & Netter, Jeffry, 1997. "Access to Bank Loans in a Transition Economy: The Case of Hungary," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 79-89, February.
    5. David D. Li, 1996. "A Theory of Ambiguous Property Rights in Transition Economies: The Case of the Chinese Non-State Sector," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 8, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    6. Li, David D., 1996. "A Theory of Ambiguous Property Rights in Transition Economies: The Case of the Chinese Non-State Sector," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1996. "The Roles of the State and the Market in Establishing Property Rights," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 87-103, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xu, Chenggang & Zhang, Xiaobo, 2009. "The evolution of Chinese entrepreneurial firms: Township-village enterprises revisited," IFPRI discussion papers 854, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Dongshui Xie & Caiquan Bai & Huimin Wang & Qihang Xue, 2022. "The Land System and the Rise and Fall of China’s Rural Industrialization: Based on the Perspective of Institutional Change of Rural Collective Construction Land," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, June.
    3. Walsh, Patrick Paul & Whelan, Ciara, 2001. "Firm performance and the political economy of corporate governance: survey evidence for Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 85-112, June.
    4. Sonin, Konstantin, 2003. "Why the rich may favor poor protection of property rights," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 715-731, December.
    5. Le, Manh-Duc & Pieri, Fabio & Zaninotto, Enrico, 2019. "From central planning towards a market economy: The role of ownership and competition in Vietnamese firms’ productivity," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 693-716.
    6. Sean M. Dougherty & Robert H. McGuckin, 2001. "The Effect of Ownership Structure and Jurisdictional Governance on Productivity in Chinese Enterprises," Economics Program Working Papers 02-01, The Conference Board, Economics Program, revised Jan 2002.
    7. Zhang, Xiaobo, 2006. "Asymmetric property rights in China's economic growth," DSGD discussion papers 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Feng, Xunan & Johansson, Anders C. & Zhang, Tianyu, 2014. "Political participation and entrepreneurial initial public offerings in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 269-285.
    9. Chowdhury, Prabal Roy, 2013. "Land acquisition: Political intervention, fragmentation and voice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 63-78.
    10. Park, Albert & Shen, Minggao, 2003. "Joint liability lending and the rise and fall of China's township and village enterprises," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 497-531, August.
    11. Ito, Junichi, 2006. "Economic and institutional reform packages and their impact on productivity: A case study of Chinese township and village enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 167-190, March.
    12. Bischoff, Ivo, 2002. "Efficiency-Enhancing Effects Of Private And Collective Enterprises In Transitional China," Discussion Papers 26467, University of Giessen, Center for International Development and Environmental Research.
    13. Zhang, Yin-Fang & Parker, David, 2002. "Labour and Total Factor Productivity in the Chinese Electronics Industry in the 1990s," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30628, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    14. Justin Yifu Lin, 2007. "Development and Transition : Idea, Strategy, and Viability," Development Economics Working Papers 22709, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    15. Tetsushi Sonobe & Keijiro Otsuka, 2004. "Productivity Effects of TVE Privatization: The Case Study of Garment and Metal-Casting Enterprises in the Greater Yangtze River Region," NBER Chapters, in: Governance, Regulation, and Privatization in the Asia-Pacific Region, pages 231-247, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Zhong Qin & Vinod Mishra & Russell Smyth, 2016. "An empirical examination of endogenous ownership in Chinese private enterprises," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 513-530, October.
    17. Yingyi Qian, 1999. "The Institutional Foundations of China's Market Transition," Working Papers 99011, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    18. Dougherty, Sean & Herd, Richard & He, Ping, 2007. "Has a private sector emerged in China's industry? Evidence from a quarter of a million Chinese firms," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 309-334.
    19. Massimo Bordignon & Yanhua Deng & Jian Huang & Jin Yang, 2018. "Plunging into the Sea: Ideological Change, Institutional Environments and Private Entrepreneurship in China," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza def074, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    20. Philippe Dulbecco & Marie-Françoise Renard, 2003. "Permanency and Flexibility of Institutions: The Role of Decentralization in Chinese Economic Reforms," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 327-346, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:reorpe:v:32:y:2000:i:3:p:461-469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.urpe.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.