Search results

The purpose of this second part of this special issue is to contribute to a better understanding of the nature of Soviet society. It is not possible to analyse such a society in all its complexities within the space of one study. There are, however, some economic relations which determine society's major features. We believe that commodity‐production relations in the Soviet Union are of this type.

The international division of employment in the clothing and textile industry has been changing in the last 20 years. Such employment has declined in developed market economies but increased in developing countries and centrally planned economies. It is a widely held view that this is a result of the internationalisation of the Babbage principle. This theory and other forces that may be operating are discussed and illustrated with a case study of the UK textile multinational, Tootal. The case of Tootal suggests a need for a more multidimensional analysis than is produced by relying on the Babbage principle. The company's contribution to the new international division of labour has been to shift its emphasis much more towards its circuits of money capital and commodity capital and to internationalise these circuits. Tootal is a better example of the international centralisation of capital through financial and marketing lines than of the international fragmentation of products.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the reasons and development trend of the new round of restructuring of regional division of labor in East Asia after the global financial crisis and the role of China in the process.

The paper probes into four factors leading to the adjustment of regional division of labor in East Asia before analyzing its development trend trough comparing the change of roles of China and ASEAN in the process.

After the flying-geese division and regional production network, East Asia’s regional division of labor is getting a new round of structural adjustment. The analysis of this paper shows that this adjustment is mainly due to global financial crisis, post-crisis de-globalization, the rebalancing of East Asian economies and China’s economic transformation. From the adjustment direction, the main trend is ASEAN gradually replacing China to become the new assembly plant area, while China becomes a new manufacturing power by its rising status in the global value chain.

The paper describes the development trend of the new round of restructuring of regional division of labor in East Asia in the future and gives the policy implications for the East Asian countries.

Unions are the potential but secure democratic counterforce to capital. The creation of “objective conditions” for international co‐operation has preceded but must result in “subjective conditions”. This theme survives little challenged as a central tenet of the official labour movement in country after country. The pervasive complacency in other circles concerning the prospects for industrial democracy to be achieved through the internationalisation of the evolutionary, pluralistic collective bargaining model, particularly at a time when that model seems unable to cope with born again free market philosophies even at a national level.

To realise the shared development of the digital economy, people need to transcend the capital logic and advocate the logic of cooperative development, i.e. “co-construction, benefit-sharing and co-governance”. This study aims to discuss the aforementioned statement.

Platform economy is a new economic form produced by the transformation of the social production patterns in the era of digital capitalism. In the neo-imperialist stage, a new stage of capitalist development, capital logic promotes the global expansion of the platform economy and influences its development process, organisational form, contradictions and dilemmas and internal transcendence. Having the spatiotemporal chain of capital circulation repaired, the globalisation of the platform economy is reshaping how the means of production are combined with labour, affecting the local changes in the general relations of production and “international relations of production”.

In the accumulation of digital capitalism, the social contradictions and fundamental contradictions in the capitalist world have been further intensified, making exploitation, income distribution gap, monopoly and other problems increasingly severe. The imbalance and inequality in the global development of the digital economy are increasingly prominent.

Regarding the global governance of the digital economy, China, as a major responsible country, will strive to encourage all countries to co-build a community with a shared future in cyberspace. In the new international development pattern of digital economy globalisation, China must take effective measures to actively safeguard its national security and development interests to meet specific challenges.

Allyn Young′s lectures, as recorded by the young Nicholas Kaldor, survey the historical roots of the subject from Aristotle through to the modern neo‐classical writers. The focus throughout is on the conditions making for economic progress, with stress on the institutional developments that extend and are extended by the size of the market. Organisational changes that promote the division of labour and specialisation within and between firms and industries, and which promote competition and mobility, are seen as the vital factors in growth. In the absence of new markets, inventions as such play only a minor role. The economic system is an inter‐related whole, or a living “organon”. It is from this perspective that micro‐economic relations are analysed, and this helps expose certain fallacies of composition associated with the marginal productivity theory of production and distribution. Factors are paid not because they are productive but because they are scarce. Likewise he shows why Marshallian supply and demand schedules, based on the “one thing at a time” approach, cannot adequately describe the dynamic growth properties of the system. Supply and demand cannot be simply integrated to arrive at a picture of the whole economy. These notes are complemented by eleven articles in the Encyclopaedia Britannica which were published shortly after Young′s sudden death in 1929.

In this contribution to the increasing literature on the international division of labour and the New International Economic Order (NIEO) we wish to concentrate on some of the labour aspects of socio‐economic growth. This will be approached in the first section by considering socio‐economic growth as one aspect of the socio‐economic system outlined previously but here slightly expanded conceptually: in section two we briefly examine the ideas of the NIEO; and in the final section we consider some of the labour aspects of the NIEO.

The article builds upon recent developments in feminist theories as they were adopted in organization studies to review the state of research into women in MNCs and to offer new directions for the study of MNCs as “gendering organizations,” both as they are shaped by gender relations and are active agents in constructing gender categories, division of labor, images, and inequalities. Juxtaposing insights from gender studies and International Business and Management, the article offers a new agenda for the studies of corporate internationalization and its social consequences.

In recent decades, capitalist globalization has entailed a new international division of labor with the relocation of some stages of manufacturing production from the Center to the Periphery through the Global value chains (GVCs). This new pattern of global production is marked by wide income disparities between the different regions of the world economy, accentuated by value transfers hidden within both traditional and GVCs international trade. The chapter presents a theoretical model based on a Marxian approach for the accounting of unequal exchange in international trade in value-added, resulting from the decoupling of value-produced and value-captured inside and outside GVCs. The empirical results show the ongoing relevance of unequal exchange in contemporary capitalism as one of the fundamental causes of disparities in income and economic development among the countries of the global economy.