Bringing Asia into the comparative capitalism perspective

Storz, Cornelia; Amable, Bruno; Casper, Steven; Lechevalier, Sébastien

doi:10.1093/ser/mwt004

Cited by 44 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Elsewhere, we have baptized this type of capitalism 'state-permeated market economy' (SME), as a way of extending the existing typologies within Comparative Capitalism (Nölke, 2012;Nölke et al, 2014). Even as the SME model contains a much cruder perspective on the Chinese economy than recent typologies of Asian capitalism (Walter and Zhang, 2012a, b;Storz et al, 2013;Witt and Redding, 2013) and largely focuses on urban regions within large emerging markets, its simplicity still allows us to link the specific issues of banking regulation and factions to broader features of Chinese capitalism in a stringent manner.…”

Section: Factions In a Broader Perspective: China As A Smementioning

confidence: 99%

International financial regulation and domestic coalitions in state-permeated capitalism: China and global banking rules

Nölke

2015

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China plays a 'mainstream' role in global banking negotiations and does not articulate positions that considerably contradict those of the dominant actors (for example, the United States or United Kingdom). Still, the Chinese banking sector differs quite considerably from those of Western economies. In order to understand the Chinese stance on international banking regulation, we need to look at the development of domestic regulation in China. An analysis of institutional changes in Chinese banking regulations highlights the importance of various political-economic factions that have different positions on banking regulation. These factions are a core ingredient of the Chinese statepermeated model of capitalism. Moreover, it is impossible to understand the development of this type of capitalism without taking the size of the economy and the timing of its historical insertion into global capitalism into account.

show abstract

Section: Factions In a Broader Perspective: China As A Smementioning

confidence: 99%

International financial regulation and domestic coalitions in state-permeated capitalism: China and global banking rules

Nölke

2015

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, Appendices B and C show the change from 1996 to 2016 in China and the USA. China is changing rapidly in performance and institutions behind it (Storz, Amable, Casper, & Lechevalier, 2013). This science-sustainability paradox supplies a contextual opportunity, in conjunction with interdisciplinary science, for the analysis two comparative capitalisms (Boyer, 2005(Boyer, , 2008.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The literature explains that the market activities support the LEE capitalism in knowledge creation to its economic exploitation. In these market activities, individual and private enterprises make independent decisions in the science-sustainability relations (Storz et al, 2013). On the opposite, the state's entrepreneurial decisions support the SEE capitalism in knowledge creation to its exploitation (Duckett, 1996;Eisinger, 1988;Mazzucato, 2014;Tiberghien, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Currently, most writer target the Chinese Co2 emission and environmental degradation (Gan, 1998;Schweizer-Ries, 2008;Liu, Lyu, Pan, & Wang, 2017;Du, & Yang,2017;Zhang, Winchester, & Zhang, 2017a;Zhang, Peng, Chao-Qun, & Shen, 2017b;Chen, & Yan, 2018;Yan, Yi, Qiu & Yang, 2018). Since China receives scientific glory as well as environmental blame (Lancet, 2017), we find it necessary that the inter-disciplinary comparison within the SEE explored because of international diversity of sub-systems (Storz et al, 2013). Second, the current literature overwhelmingly examines the stability and change in the Western types of capitalism; it neglects the combination of stability and rapid change in China (Storz et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since China receives scientific glory as well as environmental blame (Lancet, 2017), we find it necessary that the inter-disciplinary comparison within the SEE explored because of international diversity of sub-systems (Storz et al, 2013). Second, the current literature overwhelmingly examines the stability and change in the Western types of capitalism; it neglects the combination of stability and rapid change in China (Storz et al, 2013). Naturally, the current literature lacks specific analysis of the inter-disciplinary analysis between energy science and environmental science as contributors to sustainability-a type of innovation performance (Storz et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Science-sustainability Transformational Paradox: An Interdisciplinary and Inter-Institutional Analysis

Th¹,

Chunhui²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Science-Sustainability poses an interdisciplinary paradox. On the one hand, the science for sustainability has increased in OECD economies particularly in China and US; on the other hand, the sustainability situation has worsened (Co2 emission has risen). The adverse correlation shows a paradox. However, without explicating the science-sustainability relationship, it leads to a premature conclusion. In this study, we have drawn on three concrete questions for concrete answers. First, whether and how interdisciplinary sciences-energy science and environmental science-contribute to the sustainability. Second, whether and how the Sino-US inter-institutional analysis varies in the science-sustainability paradox. The empirical analysis from a panel data in the interdisciplinary and inter-institutional context show mixed patterns in three ways.

show abstract

The Chinese business system and itsauthoriliberaleconomic model

Figueira

Oliveira

2021

Thunderbird Intl Bus Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China's position as one of the most powerful nations in the world is undisputed.However, in an evolving landscape, China's utilization of a path-dependent business system may hinder the ability of the country's institutions to undergo necessary change, which will have important implications for international business literature. Through business system theory, empirical evidence, and a mixed methods approach, we discuss China's business system explaining how the system may impair sustainable growth and the transformation required by a less dependent industrial society.Our research suggests that the Chinese business system is still very arrested due to its recent past, and the Chinese Communist Party has only partial interest in improving some of the most important bases for the development of modern enterprises, even if fostering a somewhat liberal economic approach. Since similar political (authoritarian) and economic (liberal) approaches are found elsewhere, we theorize on what we called an authoriliberal economic approach.

show abstract

Bringing Asia into the comparative capitalism perspective

Cited by 44 publications

References 33 publications

International financial regulation and domestic coalitions in state-permeated capitalism: China and global banking rules

International financial regulation and domestic coalitions in state-permeated capitalism: China and global banking rules

Science-sustainability Transformational Paradox: An Interdisciplinary and Inter-Institutional Analysis

The Chinese business system and itsauthoriliberaleconomic model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About