| ID | 183831 |
| Title Proper | Why China Never Wanted Shock Therapy and Thus Needed No Escaping from It |
| Other Title Information | a Critique of Isabella M. Weber’s Argument |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Marcin Piatkowski, Zhang Chunlin ; Piatkowski, Marcin ; Chunlin, Zhang |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | This article reviews Isabella M. Weber’s book How China Escaped Shock Therapy: The Market Reform Debate. While in many ways a brilliant book, it can nonetheless be misleading and, in certain areas, misinformed. First, China has never really attempted shock therapy: it has almost always followed a gradual approach to reforms more akin to “acupuncture” rather than a “shock” therapy. Second, the definition of shock therapy that the book uses is deceptive, because it meant different things in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), Russia and China. Third, the importance of the 1980s debates seems to be exaggerated: China has never implemented shock therapy largely because of more fundamental forces, and not due to the fact that “dual-track reformers” had “saved” China. Fourth, while China, with its “gradualist” approach in reforms, has become the world’s growth champion, most CEE countries that underwent shock therapy did not fare badly either. |
| `In' analytical Note | China: An International Journal Vol. 20, No.1; Feb 2022: p. 159-168 |
| Journal Source | China: An International Journal 2022-03 20, 1 |