The nonsocialist NICs: East Asia

Ellen Comisso and her colleagues are interested in the differences among all nations in their strategic economic responses to the petroleum price hikes of the 1970s—and, by extension, in why some states consistently outperform others in economic adjustment and growth. In particular, Comisso wants to know why the centrally planned economies (CPEs) of Eastern Europe reacted differently from one another to the shocks of the 1970s and yet, as a group, consistently performed less well than some reference groups, notably the East Asian NICs (newly industrialized countries). At the heart of Comisso's and the other authors' concerns are the notions of state “structure†and “process,†particularly as derived from Peter Katzenstein and the other contemporary comparative political economists, since on structural grounds the East European CPEs appear similar to the quasi-corporatist or “bureaucratic authoritarian†NICs elsewhere in the world. They differ primarily in terms of performance—or so it seems. Why? Are structure and process the right variables, and if they are, have they been correctly conceptualized?