On Some Controversies about East Asian Developmental States
Asia-10’s stellar performance and provisional decline have prompted competing strands of scholarship to advance various development drivers, i.e. states, markets and culture. After an introductory presentation of nation-states’ shifting roles and conceptualisations, this paper purports to provide a critical overview of the statecentric approach. The next step is to ascertain whether network theories can improve upon the statist perspective. The paper concludes that neither approach does justice to the complexity of East Asian development, and suggests that an eclectic approach is a better formula.
Volume (Year): 14 (2011)
Issue (Month): 40 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.rei.ase.ro/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Étienne Gilbert, 1990. "Alice H. Amsden, Asia's Next Giant South Korea and Late Industrialization," Revue Tiers Monde, Programme National Persée, vol. 31(124), pages 953-953.
- Doner, Richard F. & Ritchie, Bryan K. & Slater, Dan, 2005. "Systemic Vulnerability and the Origins of Developmental States: Northeast and Southeast Asia in Comparative Perspective," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(02), pages 327-361, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rej:journl:v:14:y:2011:i:40:p:155-171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Radu Lupu)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.