- Eğitmen: Ziya Öniş
- Dersin Verildiği Okul: Koç Üniversitesi
- Koç Üniversitesi Ders Kodu: INTL 380
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This course offers a political economy account of the rise of emerging powers. Topics to be covered include contemporary debates on the political economy of late industrialization, the relationship between state and the economy, the importance of institutions in the development process and the rise of BRICS and near-BRICs in the changing global order. Theoretical themes are applied to the case studies of China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina, Poland and Turkey. The final part of the course will focus on the role of BRICs and near BRICs in global governance.
TEXTS
There is no textbook for the course. All required readings for the course (which include journal articles and book chapters) are listed in this syllabus. All readings are available to students at the Online E-Reserve Collection of the Suna Kıraç Library. Library web site → Catalog → Reserves by course → Course code: INTL 380. Some journal articles are also accessible online through the library website.
COURSE ASSESMENTS
SCHEDULE & READINGS
Development Strategies and Trajectories
- SPERI. 2018. “Revisiting the Developmental State”. http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2018/02/07/new-speri-paper-revisiting-the-developmental-state/
- Beeson, Mark. 2009. “Developmental States in East Asia: A Comparison of the Japanese and Chinese Experiences.” Asian Perspective 33 (2): 5-39.
- Thurbon, Elizabeth and Weiss, Linda (2016). 'The Developmental state in the late twentieth century' in Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Development, edited by Erik S. Reinert, Jayati Ghosh, and Rainer Kattel, Edward Elgar. Chapter 33. pp 637-650.
- Evans, Peter B. 1989. “Predatory, Developmental, and Other Apparatuses: A Comparative Political Economy Perspective on the Third World State,” Sociological Forum Special Issue: Comparative National Development: Theory and Facts for the 1990s. 4 (4): 561-587.
- Stubbs, Richard. 2009. “Whatever Happened to the East Asian Developmental State? The Unfolding Debate,” The Pacific Review 22 (1): 1-22.
- Teichman, Judith. 2016 “South Korea: Authoritarianism, Democracy and the Struggle to Maintain Inclusive Development” in The Politics of Inclusive Development: Policy, State Capacity and Coalition Building. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 133-158.
BRICS and near BRICS: an Introduction
- Stuenkel, Oliver. 2016. “Do the BRICS Possess Soft Power”, Journal of Political Power 9(3): 353-367.
- Becker, Uwe. 2013. “Introduction” in the BRICs and Emerging Economies in Comparative Perspective: Political Economy, Liberalisation and Institutional Change, eds. Uwe Becker. New York, NY: Routledge, 1-26.
- Indien, F. 2012. “Overview of BRICS” in The BRICS report. A study of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa with special focus on synergies and complementarities. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1-78.
- Narlikar, Amrita. 2013. “Negotiating the rise of new powers.” International Affairs Special Issue: Negotiating the rise of new powers 89 (3): 561–576.
- Beeson, Mark. 2010. “The Coming of Environmental Authoritarianism”, Journal of Environmental Politics 19(2): 276-294.
China
- Arrighi, Giovanni. 2007. “Origins and Dynamic of the Chinese Ascent” in Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century, London: Verso, 351-378.
- McNally, Christopher A. 2012. “Sino-Capitalism: China’s Reemergence and the International Political Economy”, World Politics 64 (4): 741-776.
- Naughton, Barry. 2010. “China's Distinctive System: can it be a model for others?”, Journal of Contemporary China 19 (65): 437-460.
- T. ten Brink (2014): The Challenges of China’s Non-liberal Capitalism for the Liberal Global Economic Order”, Harvard Asia Quarterly, 16:2, 36-44.
- Schweller, Randall L and Pu, Xiaoyu (2011). After Unipolarity: ‘‘China's Visions of International Order in an Era of U.S. Decline’’ International Security, Volume 36, Number 1, Summer 2011, pp. 41-72. The MIT Press.
- Clarke, Michael. 2018. “The Belt and Road Initiative: Exploring Beijing’s Motivations and Challenges for its New Silk Road Project”, Strategic Analysis 42(2): 84-102.
- Pei, Minxin. 2020 “China’s Coming Upheaval: Competition, the Coronavirus and the Weakness of Xi Jinping”, Foreign Affairs 99(3): 82-95.
Russia
- Desai, Raj M. and Itzhak Goldberg, eds. 2008. “Productivity” in Can Russia Compete? Enhancing Productivity and Innovation in a Globalizing World. Brookings Institution Press, 12-34.
- Granville, Brigitte and Peter Oppenheimer, eds. 2001. “Introduction” in Russia's Post-Communist Economy. Oxford University Press, 1-20.
- Rutland, Peter. 2013. “Neoliberalism and the Russian transition”, Review of International Political Economy 20 (2): 332-362.
- Sprenger, Carsten. 2010. “State Ownership in the Russian Economy: Its Magnitude, Structure and Governance Problems.” ICEF Working Paper.
- Simeon Djankov (2015), Russia’s Economy under Putin: From Crony Capitalism to State Capitalism,
- Niall Ferguson (2016), The Russian Question
India
- D’Costa, Anthony P. 2009. “Economic Nationalism in Motion: Steel, Auto and Software Industries in India”. Review of International Political Economy 16 (4): 620-648.
- Kohli, Atul. 2007. “State, Business, and Economic Growth in India”. Studies in Comparative International Development 42 (1-2): 87-114.
- Mukherji, Rahul. 2013 “Ideas, interests, and the tipping point: Economic change in India” Review of International Political Economy 20 (2): 363-389.
- Narlikar, Amrita. 2013. “India rising: responsible to whom?” International Affairs Special Issue: Negotiating the rise of new powers. 89 (3): 595–614.
- Plagemann, Johannes and Sandra Destradi. 2019. “Populism and Foreign Policy: The Case of India.” Foreign Policy Analysis15(2): 283-301.
- Nayar, Baldev. 1998. "Political Structure and India's Economic Reforms of the 1990s." Pacific Affairs 71 (3): 335-358.
- Sen, Kunal. 2009. “What a Long, Strange Trip It’s Been: Reflections on India’s Economic Growth in the Twentieth Century.” Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics, Working Paper n.47.
Brazil
- Ban, Cornel. 2012. “Brazil's liberal neo-developmentalism: New paradigm or edited orthodoxy?” Review of International Political Economy 20 (2): 1-34.
- Milani, Carlos R.S. and Tiago Nery. 2019 “The Sketch of Brazil’s Grand Strategy under the Workers’ Party (2003-2016): Domestic and International Constraints”, South African Journal of International Affairs 26(1): 73-92.
- Burges, Sean W. 2013. “Brazil as a bridge between old and new powers?” International Affairs Special Issue: Negotiating the rise of new powers 89 (3): 577–594.
- Evans, Peter. 1979. Dependent Development: The Alliance of Multinational, State, and Local Capital in Brazil, Ch.2. Princeton: Princeton University Press. p. 55-100.
- Melo, M. A. (2016). “Crisis and integrity in Brazil”. Journal of Democracy, 27(2), 50-65.
- Öniş, Z and Alper Şükrü Gencer. 2018. “Democratic BRICS as Role Models in a Shifting Global Order: Inherent Dilemmas and the Challenges Ahead”. Third World Quarterly 39(9): 1791-1811.
South Africa
- Fine, Ben. 2010. “Can South Africa be a Developmental State?” in Constructing a Democratic Developmental State in South Africa: Potential and Challenges, ed. O. Edigheji. Cape Town: HSRC Press. p. 169-183.
- Shaw, Timothy M. 2012. ‘‘Africa's Quest for Developmental States: ‘renaissance’ for whom?’’ Third World Quarterly. Vol: 33, Issue 5. PP.837-851.
- Nattrass, Nicoli. 2014. ‘’A South African Variety of Capitalism’s’’ New Political Economy. Vol. 19, Issue 1. pp 56-78. Published Online.
- Clark, Nancy L. 2014. ‘’Structured Inequality: Historical Realities of the Post-Apartheid Economy’’ Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies, 38(1).pp. 93-118.
- Peet, Richard. 2002. “Ideology, Discourse, and the Geography of Hegemony: From Socialist to Neoliberal Development in Postapartheid South Africa”, Antipode 34 (1): 54–84.
- Carmody, Padraig. 2002. “Between Globalisation and (Post) Apartheid: The Political Economy of Restructuring in South Africa”. Journal of Southern African Studies 28 (2): 255-275.
- Southall, Roger. 2004. “The ANC & Black Capitalism in South Africa”, Review of African Political Economy 31 (100): 313-328.
- Habib, Adam.2009. South Africa's foreign policy: hegemonic aspirations, neoliberal orientations and global transformation, South African Journal of International Affairs, 16:2, 143-159.
- Schoeman, Maxi. 2015. South Africa as an emerging power: from label to ‘status consistency’? South African Journal of International Affairs, 22:4, 429-445.
- Beresford, Alexander. 2016 ‘’Africa rising?’’ Review of African Political Economy, 43:147, 1-7. Routledge.
Poland
- Woodruff, David. 2004. “Property Rights in Context: Privatization’s Legacy for Corporate Legality in Poland and Russia,” Studies in Comparative International Development Winter: 82-108.
- Åslund, Anders. 2007. How Capitalism Was Built: The Transformation of Central and Eastern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 1-10, 29-56, 305-313.
- Jacobsen, Gorm. 2011. “Turning Poland Around –The Polish Economy 1990 – 2009” Journal of Business Case Studies. 7 (5): 71-100.
- Lehmann, Hartmut. 2012 ‘‘The Polish Growth Miracle: Outcome of Persistent Reform Efforts’’, IZA Policy Paper No.40. University of Bologna, IZA, Bonn.
- Roaf et al. 2014. ‘‘25 Years of Transition Post-Communist Europe and the IMF’’. Regional Economic Issues Special Report. Washington,D.C. International Monetary Found.
- Ágh, Atilla.2016‘‘The Singularity of Poland or the Common Historical Trajectory in ECE?’’Corvinus University. Polish Sociological Review 3(195). pp.389-396
- Ágh, Atilla 2016‘‘Increasing Eupopulism as the megatrend in East-Central Europe: From façade democracies to velvet dictatorships’’ Baltic Journal of Political Science. No 5. pp 21-39.
- Szczerbiak, Aleks. 2015. ‘‘A Model for Democratic Transition and European Integration? Why Poland Matters’’SEI Working Paper No 138. Sussex European Institute.
Mexico and Argentina
- Moreno-Brid, Juan Carlos and Jaime Ros. 2009. “Why Has Post-reform Growth Been Disappointing?” in Development and Growth in the Mexican Economy - A Historical Perspective, Oxford University Press, 222-251.
- Morton, Adam David. 2003. “Structural change and neoliberalism in Mexico: 'Passive revolution' in the global political economy”, Third World Quarterly 24 (4): 631-653.
- Teichman, Judith. 2016 “Mexico and Indonesia: Politics and Development Policies in Weak States” in The Politics of Inclusive Development: Policy, State Capacity and Coalition Building. New York: Palgrave and Macmillan, 67-104.
- Buera, Francisco, Gastón Navarro, Juan Pablo Nicolini. 2011. “The Argentine Economy After Two Centuries”, Latin American Journal of Economics versión On-line ISSN 0719-0433
- Wylde, Christopher. 2016. ‘Post-Neoliberal Developmental Regimes in Latin America: Argentina under Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner’, New Political Economy, 21(3), 322-341.
Turkey
- Öniş, Ziya and Mustafa Kutlay. 2013 “Rising Powers in a Changing Global Order: The Political Economy of Turkey in the Age of BRICS”. Third World Quarterly, 34 (8): 1409-1426.
- Aytac, S. Erdem, Ziya Öniş. 2014. “Varieties of Populism in a Changing Global Context: The Divergent Paths of Erdogan and Kirchnerismo”, Comparative Politics, 47 (1): 41-59.
- Dorlach, Tim. 2015. “The Prospects of Egalitarian Capitalism in the Global South: Turkish Social Neoliberalism in Comparative Perspective”, Economy and Society 44(4): 519-544.
- Öniş, Ziya and Mustafa Kutlay. 2019. “Global Shifts and the Limits of the EU’s Transformative Power in the European Periphery: Comparative Perspectives from Hungary and Turkey”. Government and Opposition 54(2): 226-253.
- Öniş, Ziya and Mustafa Kutlay, 2017 “The Dynamics of Emerging Middle Power Influence in Regional and Global Governance: The Paradoxical Case of Turkey”. Australian Journal of International Affairs 71(2): 164-183.
Washington Consensus, Post-Washington Consensus, and the Beijing Consensus: Clash of Norms and Implications for Global Governance
- Öniş, Ziya, Fikret Şenses. 2005. “Rethinking the Emerging Post-Washington Consensus”, Development and Change 36 (2): 263–290.
- Ferchen, Matt. 2013. “Whose China Model is it anyway? The contentious search for consensus”, Review of International Political Economy 20 (2): 390-420.
- Jiang, Yang. 2011. “Rethinking the Beijing Consensus: How China Responds to Crises.” The Pacific Review 24 (3): 337-356.
- Yağcı, Mustafa. 2016. “A Beijing Consensus in the Making: The Rise of Chinese Initiatives in the International Political Economy and Implications for Developing Countries”, Perceptions 21(2) : 29-56.
- Öniş, Ziya and Mustafa Kutlay. 2020. “The New Age of Hybridity and Clash of Norms: China, BRICS, and Challenges of Global Governance in a Post-Liberal International Order,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 45(3). Online First Version available.
COURSE POLICIES
-
1. Make-Up Exams
Students who miss an exam and wish to write a make-up must contact the professor within 24 hours after the exam and must provide proper documentation for a reasonable excuse (e.g. a doctor’s note) before the make-up. There will be only one make-up per exam. Students who miss both the regular exam and the make-up will receive an exam mark of “0”.
-
2. Classroom Conduct
Students must attend lectures on time, and remain in the classroom until the end of the lecture, except during emergencies or with prior permission of the instructor. Students are expected to behave as mature and self-aware individuals in the classroom. Disruptive behaviour such as engaging in side conversations, using cell phones and other electronic devices, sleeping, working on personal activities or assignments of other courses, interrupting the professor or other students will result in the significant reduction of the attendance and participation grade.
-
3. Academic Honesty
Honesty and trust are important to us all as individuals. Students and faculty adhere to the following principles of academic integrity at Koç University. (i) Individual accountability for all individual work, written or oral. Copying from others or providing answers or information, written or oral, to others is cheating. (ii) Providing proper acknowledgment of original author. Copying from another student’s paper or from another text without written acknowledgment is plagiarism. Recycling a paper written for another class also falls under this category. (iii) Study or project group activity is effective and authorized teamwork. Unauthorized help from another person or having someone else to write one’s paper or assignment is collusion. Cheating, plagiarism, and collusion are serious offences resulting in an “F” as your course grade and disciplinary action.
*”Koç University Statement on Academic Honesty with Emphasis on Plagiarism” ve “An Example on Accidental Plagiarism” başlıkları Panorama’ya aktarılırken çıkartılmıştır. “
Prof. Dr. Ziya Öniş, Koç Üniversitesi’nde uluslararasi politik ekonomi profesörüdür. Koç Üniversitesi Küreselleşme, Bariş ve Demokratik Yönetişim Merkezi (GLODEM) ve Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Direktörlüğü görevlerinde bulunmuştur. Öniş, Koç Üniversitesi Uluslararasi İlişkiler Bölümüne katilmadan önce Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Ekonomi Bölümünde öğretim üyesi olarak görev yapmiş (1984-1999), ayni üniversitenin Uluslararasi İlişkiler ve Siyaset Bilimi Bölümünde de dersler vermiştir. Ziya Öniş, lisans ve yüksek lisans derecelerini iktisat alaninda London School of Economics and Political Science’dan almiştir. Doktorasini ise kalkinma iktisadi alaninda Manchester Üniversitesi’nde tamamlamiştir. Prof. Öniş’in son dönem çalişmalari küresel kriz sonrasinda oluşan yeni dünya düzeni, yükselen güçlerin ekonomi politiği, kapitalizmin farkli türleri arasindaki rekabet süreçleri, küreselleşmenin ve demokrasinin geleceği temalari üzerinde yoğunlaşmaktadir
