Presumptions in Political Economy: Alternative Approaches for Assessing the Economic Role of the State

By the 1980s and 1990s, neoliberal policies such as privatizations and deregulations transforming the minimal state model to regulative state model from the Keynesian social welfare state system made some structural and functional changes in the state mechanism, and the public administration has been in the first place due to the changing relationship between the state and the market. In fact, within this context, the new institutional economics (NIE) had a remarkable influence upon the debates upon the altering role of the state. Hence, the transformation of the state in this regard also revealed the argumentations on the governance paradigm along with the doctrinaire contributions of the new institutional economics. Therefore, this chapter will discuss the transformation of the state and the political economy of the governance together with a critical assessment of the new institutional economics in the public administration.

Download Full-text

Book Review: The Economic Role of the State by William A. Orton. London, William Hodge & Co., 1950.189 pages.

Political Science ◽

10.1177/003231875100300209 ◽

1951 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 63-64

Author(s):

H. Belshaw

Keyword(s):

The State ◽

Economic Role ◽

Role Of The State

Download Full-text

The political economy of unfree labor and the state: An Indonesian case study

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal ◽

10.1177/0117196820925656 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (1) ◽

pp. 55-78

Author(s):

Benni Yusriza

Keyword(s):

Political Economy ◽

Migrant Workers ◽

The State ◽

The Political ◽

Role Of The State ◽

Unfree Labor ◽

Victim Protection ◽

Trafficking Victims

Employing the concept of unfree labor, this article explores the role of the state in reinforcing victims’ vulnerability and shaping the political economy of trafficking practices. Based on a case study of trafficking victims in Benjina and Ambon, Maluku Province, Indonesia, I argue that Indonesian authorities’ intervention was driven not by humanitarian interest, nor by the concern for the protection of migrant workers’ rights, but rather by the intent to advance a political and economic agenda against the Thai fishing industry. Consequently, the intervention ignored the exploitative relations of production that underpinned the vulnerability of victims, despite being conducted in the name of victim-protection and improving livelihoods.

Download Full-text