China versus the Washington Consensus: The Anomaly for World Bank Advocacy Research
The Chinese experience of economic transformation has presented a serious challenge to the Washington Consensus. Since the mid-1990s, institutions upholding the Washington Consensus have mostly excluded the Chinese experienceâ€“because of its conspicuous anomaly-in their attempts to interpret worldwide transition and development in line with their policy doctrines. Yet, China did in fact rigorously implement the policy doctrines in the years 1993-1997, but only to result in severe social and economic problems. Since 1998, in the face of the problems and because of increasingly social resistance to the mainstream policies, China has progressively turned to focus on "constructing a harmonious society". This turn represents a quest for a model of social and economic development that deviates fundamentally from the Washington Consensus. This paper was first presented at SOAS on May 2008 at the seminars series entitled "The World Bank after Deaton: the Future of Development Research".
|Date of creation:||Jan 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.soas.ac.uk/economics/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Stanley Fischer, 2001. "Ten Years of Transition: Looking Back and Looking Forward," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(4), pages 1.
- Lo, Dic, 1999. "Reappraising the Performance of China's State-Owned Industrial Enterprises, 1980-96," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(6), pages 693-718, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:soa:wpaper:164. 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: (Duo QIN)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Duo QIN to update the entry or send us the correct address
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.