Interdependence on the global arena: economic predominance or negligence?
It is also difficult to analyse the conflicting relations between state and market without discussing the international scene. As Underhill (2001) suggests, “there is an intimate connection between the domestic and international level of analysis”. After all, changes in the international economic scenario will most likely affect the economic situation and the balance within a country. If it does not change, it is probably because the government has taken specific actions to avoid it.
Furthermore, much of the analyses today are focused on the field of International Political Economy (Cox 1981:126). The process of globalisation, the flows of capital, goods and people around the world, despite not being a new phenomenon, has dramatically increased in the …show more content…
Underhill (2000:821) indicates that some regulations which are considered as being government prerogatives are actually at the mercy of private interests. This indeed occurs, especially if you take in account big corporations with direct political influence (lobby) which seek the interest of a specific company or sector. Interest than may be in direct opposition to society interest.
As far as the debate goes, there are several and recurrent critiques of the economic analyses of political economy. They are accused of relying too much on an economic basis, facts and factors in order to develop their theories. Consequently, they are accused of diminishing the role of the state and political factors, and even acting with political naiveté (Strange 1970).
Others scholars like Higgott (1999) and also point the negligence of economic analysts in general. This critique comes, nevertheless, accompanied with some self-critique to the political scientists and political literature on its difficulty to catch up with economic advances and globalisation of markets and business (Strange
It is also difficult to analyse the conflicting relations between state and market without discussing the international scene. As Underhill (2001) suggests, “there is an intimate connection between the domestic and international level of analysis”. After all, changes in the international economic scenario will most likely affect the economic situation and the balance within a country. If it does not change, it is probably because the government has taken specific actions to avoid it.
Furthermore, much of the analyses today are focused on the field of International Political Economy (Cox 1981:126). The process of globalisation, the flows of capital, goods and people around the world, despite not being a new phenomenon, has dramatically increased in the …show more content…
Underhill (2000:821) indicates that some regulations which are considered as being government prerogatives are actually at the mercy of private interests. This indeed occurs, especially if you take in account big corporations with direct political influence (lobby) which seek the interest of a specific company or sector. Interest than may be in direct opposition to society interest.
As far as the debate goes, there are several and recurrent critiques of the economic analyses of political economy. They are accused of relying too much on an economic basis, facts and factors in order to develop their theories. Consequently, they are accused of diminishing the role of the state and political factors, and even acting with political naiveté (Strange 1970).
Others scholars like Higgott (1999) and also point the negligence of economic analysts in general. This critique comes, nevertheless, accompanied with some self-critique to the political scientists and political literature on its difficulty to catch up with economic advances and globalisation of markets and business (Strange