Market Power and Marketisation: Japan and China's Impact on the Iron Ore Market, 50 Years Apart

Massot, Pascale

doi:10.1080/13563467.2019.1613350

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…57 As an interviewee stated, ‘Chinese (companies) felt unfairly treated, cheated or discriminated against in global market because when they want to buy, prices go up, when they want to sell, prices go down…’. 58 If these markets were situated in China, regulated by Chinese exchanges, the state could steer these markets, and forestall oligopolistic behaviour by producing companies as it exists in global markets (Massot, 2020: 9). Consequently, having their own benchmarks would give Chinese companies ‘better’ prices.…”

Section: Internationalizing China’s Capital Markets: Challenging Neoliberal Capital Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Same same, but different: Varieties of capital markets, Chinese state capitalism and the global financial order

Petry

2020

Competition & Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2009, China’s capital markets have developed and internationalized to an unprecedented degree, which has contributed to a lot of debates on China’s rise and its implications for the global financial order. Contributing to these debates, this article analyses the development of capital markets in China and their integration into global finance between 2009 and 2019, focusing on three aspects: how Chinese capital markets are developing domestically; how they are integrating with global markets; and how Chinese capital markets are internationalizing, i.e. expanding abroad. Thereby, the article analyses the crucial role of securities exchanges who as organizers of capital markets are powerful actors that exercise considerable influence over these markets and their development. This empirical investigation reveals that while they share some characteristics with ‘global’ capital markets, Chinese capital markets function quite differently. The article argues that China’s state-owned exchanges facilitate the development of state-capitalist capital markets – capital markets that follow an institutional logic derived from China’s state-capitalist economic system. Rather than giving in to a neoliberal rulebook, China’s capital markets represent an alternative to, resist and challenge the norms, principles and procedures of the contemporary global financial order. While different capital markets share some characteristics, they are institutionally embedded, and these institutional settings facilitate different institutional logics that underpin and inform the functioning of markets. Instead of viewing capital markets as homogeneous entities, the article therefore proposes to investigate a ‘varieties of capital markets’ that are shaped by different institutional logics.

show abstract

Section: Internationalizing China’s Capital Markets: Challenging Neoliberal Capital Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Same same, but different: Varieties of capital markets, Chinese state capitalism and the global financial order

Petry

2020

Competition & Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, a market can be fragmented but not competitive. Indeed, one can think of a fragmented market (low concentration levels) with high transaction costs, inefficient transportation structures, a poor regulatory context, information asymmetries and other inefficiencies, such as the Chinese domestic iron ore market (Wilson, 2012;Massot, 2020). In other words, a market can be fragmented in a very dysfunctional way, and not equivalent to a decentralized yet well-functioning competitive market.…”

Section: Typology Of Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of the study of the market in political economy: China’s rise shines light on conceptual shortcomings

Massot

2020

Competition & Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The minimalist, atomistic classical liberal definition of markets is dominant in the global political economy literature, if often implicitly so. But major shifts are occurring in the 21st century, including China’s rise, which highlight the deficiencies of this definition and challenge us to develop fresh tools to conceptualize global markets. There are three ways in which China’s emergence challenges established market conceptualizations: the continued resilience of China’s authoritarian state-led capitalist economic model, China’s positioning around notions of power and fairness in the global economy, and China’s mixed preferences regarding global markets. The study of China’s rise, far from only impressing upon us how different China is, shines a light on dynamics that are prevalent everywhere, yet suffer from a lack of attention. This paper argues that the political economy literature is limiting the development of richer conceptualizations of the market because it operates within three conceptual ‘straitjackets’: the notion of the pure market as ideal- type, the state-market dichotomy and the notion of a sequential progression towards a market economy. The fact that markets are an underdefined concept deprives us of useful tools for elucidating important questions about markets in the global economy and limits our capacity to evaluate China’s impact on global markets. Drawing from diverse literatures, from comparative politics, to classical political economy and economic sociology, this paper develops an institutionally grounded set of tools, including a list of characteristics and a typology, to define, evaluate and compare markets, and inspire others to contribute to the endeavour.

show abstract

The South–South investment that never happened: Vale in Guinea

Alencastro

Cezne²

2023

The Extractive Industries and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Market Power and Marketisation: Japan and China's Impact on the Iron Ore Market, 50 Years Apart

Cited by 7 publications

References 75 publications

Same same, but different: Varieties of capital markets, Chinese state capitalism and the global financial order

Same same, but different: Varieties of capital markets, Chinese state capitalism and the global financial order

The state of the study of the market in political economy: China’s rise shines light on conceptual shortcomings

The South–South investment that never happened: Vale in Guinea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About