| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
178741
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This research seeks to reconceptualise the process of marketizing central state-owned enterprises (CSOEs) in the Chinese petroleum industry by interpreting their institutional establishment and reconstruction, and the change in their institutional context. The enterprise reform of state-owned oil companies, and the partial market liberalization initiated in the 1980s, have not pushed the petroleum sector toward the trajectory of the neoliberal free market. On the contrary, the state’s ascendency has been reconsolidated, and the institutional practice adhered to has made market-shaping possible. The state’s role is not fixed; rather, it has varied following the marketization process of the CSOEs. The state has reconstructed its role to strengthen its authority in the market, using market mechanisms to effectively improve its power to construct a flexible economic governance structure. In such a structure, where the state and market have mutually shaped each other, the combination of the two seemingly conflicting concepts of marketization and economic security has, to some degree, fostered the development of state-owned oil companies and expanded the scale of their asset-holding. The paper contributes to the broader discussion of state-market relationships and the institutionalization of energy governance with regard to China’s integration into the global capitalist economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
137478
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the aftermath of Russia's accession process to the World Trade Organization in 2011, an extensive public debate emerged on the modernisation of the economy. Enhanced state intervention and authoritarian modernisation were promoted as suitable options for Russia by opponents to neo-liberalism. Medvedev's liberal alternative was promptly discredited in the course of the political competition with Putin. Using ethnographic work, the present essay identifies three models of economic reform and investigates the way they have been considered by professionals in business and trade. The first model, the strategic model, contrary to conventional wisdom, is discussed in the discourse of business actors in terms of economic patriotism, public intervention and state strategic planning; second, the market model is viewed by others as a fully legitimate model; and a third model, the innovation model, combines narratives of efficiency and autonomy, which is attractive but fragile. Beyond their differences, these views have in common a concern to display the relationship of the business sector to the political sphere as a key variable for economic reform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|