Radical Political Economy of Development
Paper Session
Sunday, Jan. 9, 2022 3:45 PM - 5:45 PM (EST)
- Chair: Paul Cooney, URPE and Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador-Quito
Regional Intergovernmental Organization Response to COVID-19: Neoliberal Entrenchment or a Progressive Opportunity?
Abstract
As shown by Dionne & Turkmen (2020), pandemics tend to exacerbate the marginalization of oppressed groups. In the United States, for example, marginalized groups have been the bearers of the brunt of pandemic suffering in terms of economic losses and health outcomes (Kantamneni 2020). Barnett (2020) argues that this suffering is the result of the neoliberal ethos, which argues certain “sacrifices” must be made as part of dealing with crises and these “sacrifices” taking the form of market-selected deaths. We investigate the argument by examining the response to COVID-19 from four regional organizations: the Organization of American States, the European Union, the African Union, and the Asia Development Bank. In this context, we make two important contributions: First, whether these organizations alleviated the suffering of marginalized groups or if they exacerbated them. As discussed by Lipscy (2020), the current neoliberal order neglects non-militarized crises. As these are likely to become more prominent due to, e.g., climate change generating climate refugees, understanding how regional intergovernmental organizations currently respond to such non-military crises today will give us an understanding of how they can be expected to respond in the future. Second, based on this, we then identify the structural and institutional transformations necessary so that these regional organizations can better serve these traditionally marginalized groups, rather than the needs of the powerful.Paths of Development in the Southern Cone: Deindustrialization and Reprimarization in Argentina and Brazil and Their Socio-Environmental Impacts
Abstract
This paper analyzes the current development paths that have been pursued in the two most industrialized countries of the Southern Cone, namely Brazil and Argentina, in recent decades. It has been argued that both countries have been pursuing new developmentalism and yet that which has dominated in reality are the processes of deindustrialization and reprimarization. In order to understand these tendencies and their implications, the specifics of each country are examined. The paper begins with a brief summary of the historical experiences of industrialization in both Argentina and Brazil, followed by a summary of neoliberal globalization and how the roles of the IMF, the WTO, and TNCs, contributed to these tendencies. This is followed by an evaluation of the processes of deindustrialization and reprimarization for both countries. Moreover, detailed analysis of these tendencies for both countries is carried out for extensive periods.Section six of this paper advances the discussion of the theoretical concept of accumulation by dispossession by David Harvey and evaluates its relevance in understanding the processes of reprimarization in both Argentina and Brazil. This is carried out through a more thorough analysis of the expansion of primary activities, namely, the sectors of transgenic soy production, cattle, and mega-mining, and analyzing the role of the State and transnationals, through legal and illegal means, in expropriations of local populations.
Towards a Unified Marxist Conception of Contemporary Petty Commodity Production
Abstract
Since the 1980s, attempts to analyze rising informality in developing countries from a politicaleconomy perspective have led to a surge in the study of (non-agricultural) petty commodity
production, and its relationship with capitalist production. Contributions that theorize
contemporary petty commodity production as non-transitory are important for two reasons —
they enrich the literature on dualism in Development Economics and Industrial Organization,
and also the Marxian political economy literature through a rejection of linearity of transitions to
capitalism. In this paper, I compare two prominent and distinct Marxist theorizations of
contemporary petty commodity production by Barbara Harriss-White and Kalyan Sanyal. I
argue that the two theorizations are nearly identical in the specific characterization of petty
commodity production itself, only to be distinguished by their conceptions of the ways in which
petty commodity production and capitalist production interact. Further, I argue that both
conceptions rest on the recognition or assumption of the fixity of the ‘space’ for capitalist
production in developing countries, but do not satisfactorily explain why this space is limited in
the first place.
JEL Classifications
- O1 - Economic Development
- B5 - Current Heterodox Approaches