Search results

This paper aims to argue that the Global Political Economy (GPE) theory of neomercantilism provides a sound explanation to the American military involvement in the Persian Gulf. Accordingly, this paper also proposes the concept of “Neomercantilist War” which analyses the use of military force to protect a strategically vital economic resource (such as Gulf oil). Neomercantilist War is a point of similarity between the GPE school of neomercantilism and the International Relations (IR) school of realism.

The 1991 Gulf War and the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 are two major events of American military involvement to protect and/or seize Gulf oil. These two events will be tested for neomercantilism, in addition to the concept of “Neomercantilist War” as presented in the paper. The first feature, or definitional component, of neomercantilism is the major role of the state, the second is the preponderance of security/geopolitical goals over economic goals and the third is the zero-sum, relative gains mentality to dealing between states IR.

The GPE school of neomercantilism and the concept of Neomercantilist War do offer a sound explanation of American military involvement in the Gulf.

The American military involvement in the Gulf region has been analysed using the IR schools of realism and liberalism, but never using GPE theory. Even though GPE is mostly concerned with economic activity, the scope of GPE should be expanded to include military policies if they affect economic resources and activity.

The so-called “oil price war” of 2014-2016 took place between several main global oil producers; OPEC (led by Saudi Arabia), Russia and the newcomer; American tight oil or fracking oil. These oil producers were competing against each other over market shares in the global oil market, by maintaining their high oil production rates, even if this led to a decline in oil prices and a reduction in revenues from oil sales. As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper aims to argue that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

This paper tests for neomercantilism by testing three of its main definitional components. The first definitional component is that the state, as the political authority, intervenes in the economic decisions. The second component is the primacy of the state interests over business corporate profits, or the primacy of political and security considerations over short-term economic and corporate profit considerations. The third is the zero-sum or relative gains nature of dealings between states. Afterwards, this paper tests for neomercantilism in the Saudi policy by examining how each of these definitional components is reflected in the Saudi policy during the oil price war.

As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper argues that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

As energy politics need more coverage in International Political Economy (IPE) theory, this paper argues that Saudi Arabia's policies during the oil price war of 2014-2016 reflected a policy of neomercantilism, which is the IPE equivalent of the school of realism in International Relations (IR).

Purpose – This chapter explores the way in which the food crisis of 2008 and issues of food security have impinged upon debates about agriculture and agricultural support in Scotland.

Methodology/approach – Adopting a discourse analytic approach, a series of pivotal Scottish agricultural policy documents produced between 2001 and 2010 are examined. Official agricultural policy discourse over time is traced as is the nature of that discourse as the food crisis impinged upon and altered the context of debates about agricultural policy reform.

Findings – The chapter finds that prior to the food crisis, agricultural policy documents were dominated by neoliberal discourse that emphasised the importance of agriculture becoming more oriented towards the market and by a growing emphasis on multifunctionality. But after the food crisis, the dominant political rhetoric utilised different arguments to defend agricultural subsidies and argue for a continuing role for the state in perpetuating agricultural production. It is suggested, however, that the key factor in this retrenchment to continued farm support was not the food crisis per se; rather, it was the intersection of issues of food security with the rise to power of the Scottish nationalists and their resistance to the UK's neoliberal position.

Originality/value – The chapter provides the key insight that, for Scotland at least, the food crisis did not spark a change in domestic agricultural policies, but rather became an argumentative resource that was opportunistically deployed in established debates about agricultural policy reform.

Discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of Public Administration necessarily involves an appraisal of the legacy of mercantilism. Few movements have had more lasting influence on the development of Public Administration or roused more controversy. As a philosophy originating in the Elizabethan era, its effects on the structure and form of political governance and organizations were astounding. Although sometimes cast as a relic of a bygone era, this article discusses how mercantilism and its progeny are alive and well in the twenty-first century global economy

This paper aims to clarify the character of globalization, to identify the changes it brings to structures of governance, and to consider ways in which these arrangements could be made to serve a good (more global) society.

This essay takes a reflective approach.

The paper considers the rules and regulatory processes that govern today's more global world. The first step in the analysis identifies globalization as a trend whereby people's lives become more interconnected on a planetary scale. The second section describes the institutional apparatuses through which global issues are governed. Global governance is seen to take shape not as a “world government”, but as a complex array of regulatory networks that span local to global scales and also combine public and private sectors. The third section assesses the normative values that this “networked” and “polycentric” governance of global affairs might serve. Both an earlier “neoliberal” design of global governance and a currently prevailing “social market” paradigm are critiqued. An alternative vision of global social and ecological democracy is offered as a more promising road to a good society in the contemporary more global world.

The paper suggests alternative guiding principles for governance of today's more global society, including the role of corporations in it.

The paper suggests ways in which global governance can deliver social justice, ecological sustainability and democracy along with material prosperity.

The paper consolidates a conception of post‐statist governance that can aid researchers and practitioners alike in mapping the processes of contemporary policymaking. The normative framework presented can, moreover, help to clarify the objectives that citizens of a more global world would wish regulation to provide.

This chapter intends to make an extended periodization of economic discussions that have taken place in Latin America throughout its history. The task is ambitious; we begin, however, with the periodization elaborated by Oreste Popescu, which we then expand and modify. As educators, we still have to work on the training of Latin American economists, due to the lack of knowledge they have not only about the region as a whole, but also of the economic debates that took place within it. This work is a first approximation and provocation aimed to jumpstart a discussion on these issues.

The collective² economic process is always a coherent phenomenon whose lines can be comprehended by the interlocking of its distinguishable elements. Not always, however, does the social whole – be it a modern nation or a “culturally poor” horde – run directly according to a comprehensive, conscious plan, carried out, for the whole, by the whole: Where this is the case – in a completely pure form, it would be in a socialist community – distinguishable tasks, facilities, etc. exist, even if the expression of economic life has not achieved any particular form.³ If, on the contrary, the social whole is leaving the responsibility for economic activity to subgroups or individuals, then the collective production process is separated into units that, seen from the outside, appear independent, autonomous, in principle left to themselves, and forthwith only oriented towards their own concern for survival – enterprises.

Economic globalization is making Strategic Management researchers increasingly aware of the important extent to which international business strategies are shaped by national, regional, and international institutions — by differing business‐state and management‐labor regimes, industrial organization, and capital allocation systems, techno‐economic processes, etc. As yet, however, relatively limited attention to the “institutional embeddedness” of corporate strategy has developed within Strategic Management education. This paper seeks to encourage debate on incorporating analysis of the institutional shaping of corporate strategies by discussing four issues recommended to be systematically addressed in Strategic Management texts, lectures, and case work. The topics are: (1) the transition from the “Fordist” to “Post‐Fordist” global economy; (2) comparative business systems analysis; (3) political forces of the global economy; (4) global warming and environmental management.