The Asian Developmental State

Reviews / Votes

Iain Pirie Lecturer in Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick. The proposal makes a compelling case for the value of the project. Essentially, the proposal is for an edited volume that studies the continued relevance of the 'developmental state' in the contemporary world economy. The first section is primarily focused on conceptual issues while the remainder of book is devoted to case studies (primarily from East Asia although India is also touched upon). The list of proposed authors includes a number of major figures within the debate on role of state in contemporary capitalism. The book should be of high quality and an important reference point for both academics and post-graduate students interested in this issue. I believe this would be a 'must have' for all serious academic libraries. I think editor is broadly correct in identifying a niche for this manuscript. For that reason I believe there is a market and I believe that it should be published I have, however, two criticisms of the project. Although I accept that these may be impossible to address at this point in the process. I believe that selection of chapters could have improved upon by adding greater diversity of argument and disciplinary background. I am only going by the contributors home departments in making this judgment but there does not appear to be any economists among them. Ben Fine argued that economists have displayed a different focus to political scientists/ sociologists (who make up the majority of contributors) when studying the developmental state. Economists being more concerned with concrete policies that can be said 'constitute' a 'developmental state' in contrast to political scientists/ sociologists who are more interested in the institutional/social relationships that underpin the developmental state. My preference would be for a volume that includes economists and political scientists/sociologists so as to capture the strength of both approaches. Second, I take the point that not all contributors are uncritical of developmental state's continued relevance or the desirability of this project/ state form. Nevertheless, none seem explicitly hostile to the project or reject its continued relevance - the chapters on India seem to argue why it is not possible in this context and thus implicitly suggest that it is possible in other contexts. If we look at the recent volume Beyond the Developmental State by Pluto we see at least two contributions that could accurately be described as hostile to the developmental state. D-O Chang rejecting the developmental state as a class project that must be opposed and Pirie arguing that changes in global economy have rendered it obsolete. I not arguing that these are right or wrong but I think they make the text more interesting and provocative. I think edited volumes are more interesting when they contain a wide array of opinion. I not suggesting the text advances a clear defined common position (clearly it does not) but that the variety of opinion could be greater. I notice that one contributor may be unable to deliver due to health issues. If these issues were to prevent her delivering I think the editor should bear the above comments in mind when selecting a replacement.