Skip Navigation


Socio-Economic Review Advance Access originally published online on March 7, 2009
Socio-Economic Review 2009 7(2):277-303; doi:10.1093/ser/mwp003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
7/2/277    most recent
mwp003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taniguchi, R.
Right arrow Articles by Babb, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press and the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The global construction of development models: the US, Japan and the East Asian miracle

Rie Taniguchi* and Sarah Babb

Department of Sociology, McGuinn Hall, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA

* Correspondence: tanigucr{at}mail.bc.edu

During the heyday of the ‘Washington Consensus’ in the 1980s and 1990s, the Japanese government became an increasingly vocal critic of its market-liberalizing prescriptions. Drawing on documents produced by the Japanese development bureaucracy, this paper analyses the origins of the Washington–Tokyo controversy, and suggests that it provides new insights into the nature of models of economic development. Such models are based on post hoc social constructs—interpretations of past events forged in part by development experts, but also by states, which can play a major role in selecting, interpreting and packaging development facts. Washington's ‘Anglo-Saxon’ model and Tokyo's ‘East Asian’ model were based on distinct interpretations of development facts, but were not as far apart as they seemed on the surface. We conclude that although development models may draw on local materials, they are also very much global products, constructed in the context of transnational networks and organizational fields.

Key Words: bureaucracy • capitalism • varieties of • economic development institutions • Japan • neo-liberalism


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.