Suchergebnisse

The impact of economic factors on colonial imperialism in the late nineteenth century has long been a topic of debate. This article examines the expected relationship between different forms of international investment and different patterns of political ties between developed and developing countries. Drawing on the literature on relational contracts and collective action, it argues that direct colonial control was likely to be associated with cross-border investments whose rents were particularly easy to seize or protect, and whose protection did not require multilateral action. Where such rents were difficult to seize or protect unilaterally, colonialism is expected to be less likely. The most common example of the former sort of investment is primary (raw-materials or agricultural) investment; of the latter, multinational manufacturing affiliates. The argument is weighed against both a survey of the qualitative evidence and some simple quantitative evaluations. The approach also has potential applications to more general problems of international conflict and cooperation.

Capital moves more rapidly across national borders now than it has in at least fifty years and perhaps in history. This article examines the effects of capital mobility on different groups in national societies and on the politics of economic policymaking. It begins by emphasizing that while financial markets are highly integrated within the developed world, many investments are still quite specific with respect to firm, sector, or location. It then argues that contemporary levels of international capital mobility have a differential impact on socioeconomic groups. Over the long run, increased capital mobility tends to favor owners of capital over other groups. In the shorter run, owners and workers in specific sectors in capital-exporting countries bear much of the burden of adjusting to increased capital mobility. These patterns can be expected to lead to political divisions about whether or not to encourage or increase international capital market integration. The article then demonstrates that capital mobility also affects the politics of other economic policies. Most centrally, it shifts debate toward the exchange rate as an intermediate or ultimate policy instrument. In this context, it tends to pit groups that favor exchange rate stability against groups that are more concerned about national monetary policy autonomy and therefore less concerned about exchange rate stability. Similarly, it tends to drive a wedge between groups that favor an appreciated exchange rate and groups that favor a depreciated one. These divisions have important implications for such economic policies as European monetary and currency union, the dollar-yen exchange rate, and international macroeconomic policy coordination.

Examines the effects of capital mobility on different groups in national societies and on the politics of economic policymaking.

This essay has presented a framework for the analysis of economic factors in political relations between developed and developing areas. The most relevant considerations in this regard are the potential costs of imperial intervention in enhancing the return to metropolitan economic interests, and the potential benefits that intervention might bring to these interests. The essay has emphasized the differential political implications of various types of metropolitan economic activity, and especially of different forms of foreign investment.

ABSTRACTThis essay analyzes the relationship between international investment interests and foreign economic policy. The first step and level of analysis looks at nation-states as the relevant actors, and claims that a country's international investment position tends to affect its international economic preferences in ways that are easily understood and anticipated. Countries' international asset positions often have a predictable impact on their policies toward international monetary relations, cross-border investment, and trade.The second step and level of analysis looks inside national societies at the international asset positions of various domestic groups. It argues that sectors with varying interests related to their international investment positions contend for influence over national policy. The economic circumstances of each sector lead to sectoral policy preferences with predictable implications for domestic bargaining over foreign economic policy. The general argument is applied briefly to a number of modern creditor countries and sectors, most prominently the United States after World War Two.

The recent experience of Latin America with overseas financial markets demonstrates the effects of foreign economic trends on domestic economic and political development. The five major Latin American debtors - Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and Chile - responded differently to a nearly identical set of external constraints and opportunities. This is due to the character of socioeconomic and political cleavages, especially the nature of relations between the business community and the labor movement

In an analysis of the relationship between foreign economic policy & international investment interests, it is hypothesized that nation-states are the primary players, & that a country's international investment position affects its international economic preferences in ways that can be understood & predicted; also, various domestic sectors with interests related to their international investment positions compete for national policy priority. The stages of capital accumulation are described, with various examples from European countries & the US, both post-WWI & -WWII. Relationships between creditor & debtor countries are discussed, with a focus on domestic policies as a driving force. It is argued that creditor status may be the result of historical conditions, such as resource endowments, culturally determined savings potential, or strategic considerations. 1 Table, 43 References. S. G. Yates

Since 1981 the Brazilian economic and political system has passed through a period of crisis and upheaval. The country's foreign debt has been at the center of its economic problems, and the debt crisis has defined many of the contours of the political crisis. This article will examine Brazil's accumulation of the Third World's largest foreign debt and the consequences of both the debt and the debt crisis for the Brazilian pattern of economic and political development. The article will focus on the role of economic interests, specifically the role of different sectors of the Brazilian business community, in the borrowing boom and bust.