Kalecki encuentra a Prebisch: cambio estructural y conflicto distributivo en la periferia
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Este trabajo recupera debates recientes entre economistas poskeynesianos acerca de la caracterización de los diferentes regímenes de crecimiento. Toma como punto de partida la tipología de Dünhaupt y Hein (2019), que es especialmente interesante para el estudio de las economías periféricas, ya que enfatiza el papel del sector externo en el crecimiento. Se argumenta que regímenes de crecimiento en los que la contribución de las exportaciones netas al crecimiento es negativa por largos periodos no son sostenibles y reflejan problemas estructurales en el patrón de especialización. La estructura productiva importa y el argumento se ilustra con la experiencia de crecimiento y cambio estructural de Suecia y Uruguay durante 1870-1939.
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
Esta obra está bajo una https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://www.eltrimestreeconomico.com.mx/index.php/te/index
Nota: la licencia de creative commons sólo aplica para la sección Artículos, para el contenido de las otras secciones, véase cada texto.
Métricas PlumX
Citas
Álvarez, J., Bértola, L., y Bohlin, J. (2022). Trade specialization, industrial growth and economic development in the Nordic and the Southern settler societies, 1870-1970. En J. Álvarez y S. Prado (eds.), Scandinavia and South America. A Tale of Two Capitalisms: Comparative Developments in Trade, Industrialisation and Inequality since 1850 (pp. 51-90). Cham, Suiza: Palgrave Macmillan.
Álvarez, J., y Prado, S. (eds.) (2022). Scandinavia and South America. A Tale of Two Capitalisms: Comparative Developments in Trade, Industrialisation and Inequality since 1850. Cham, Suiza: Palgrave Macmillan. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09198-8
Amable, B. (2001). The Diversity of Modern Capitalism. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Amsden, A. (1989). Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Baccaro, L., y Pontusson, J. (2016). Rethinking comparative political economy: The growth model perspective. Politics & Society, 44(2), 175-207. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329216638053
Baccaro, L., y Pontusson, J. (2018). Comparative Political Economy and Varieties of Macroeconomics (MPIFG Discussion Paper 18/10). Colonia: Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
Baccaro, L., y Pontusson, J. (2022). The politics of growth models. Review of Keynesian Economics, 10(2), 204-221. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.4337/roke.2022.02.04
Bértola, L., Calicchio, L., Camou, M. M., y Porcile, G. (1999). Southern Cone Real Wages Compared: A Purchasing Power Parity Approach to Convergence and Divergence Trends, 1870-1996 (documento de trabajo 44). Montevideo: Facultad de Ciencias Sociales-Udelar.
Bértola, L., Román, C., y Willebald, H. (2024). Las cuentas nacionales históricas, 1870-2023. En L. Bértola (ed.), Teleidoscopio: historia económica del Uruguay (pp. 299-328). Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria.
Bhaduri, A., y Marglin, S. A. (1990). Unemployment and the real wage: The economic basis for contesting political ideologies. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 14(4), 375-393. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035141
Bizberg, I. (2019). Diversity of Capitalisms in Latin America. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95537-7
Blecker, R. A. (2002). Distribution, demand and growth in neo-Kaleckian macro-models. En M. Setterfield (ed.), The Economics of Demand-Led Growth. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781843765325.00017
Blecker, R. A., y Setterfield, M. (2019). Heterodox Macroeconomics: Models of Demand, Distribution and Growth. Cheltenham, Reino Unido, y Northampton, Mass.: Edward Elgar.
Bolt, J., y Luiten van Zanden, J. (2020). Maddison Style Estimates of the Evolution of the World Economy. A New 2020 Update (Maddison-Project working paper WP-15). The Maddison Project.
Boyer, R. (2001). The diversity and future of capitalisms: A régulationnist analysis. En G. M. Hodgson, M. Itoh y N. Yokokawa (eds.), Capitalism in Evolution: Global Contentions – East and West (pp. 100-121). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Capraro, S., Panico, C., y Torres-González, L. D. (2023). El debate sobre la organización de la política económica en un mundo dominado por la finanza: implicaciones para México. El Trimestre Económico, 90(358), 409-459. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.20430/ete.v90i358.1751
Chang, H. J. (2002). Kicking away the Ladder. Nueva York: Anthem Press.
Cimoli, M., Pereima, J. B., y Porcile, G. (2019). A technology gap interpretation of growth paths in Latin America and Asia. Research Policy, 48(1), 125-136. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.002
Dosi, G., Fagiolo, G., y Roventini, A. (2010). Schumpeter meeting Keynes: A policy-friendly model of endogenous growth and business cycles. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 34(9), 1748-1767. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2010.06.018
Dosi, G., Grazzi, M., y Moschella, D. (2015). Technology and costs in international competitiveness: From countries and sectors to firms. Research Policy, 44(10), 1795-1814. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.012
Dosi, G., Riccio, F., y Virgillito, M. E. (2021). Varieties of deindustrialization and patterns of diversification: Why microchips are not potato chips. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 57, 182-202. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2021.01.009
Dünhaupt, P., y Hein, E. (2019). Financialization, distribution, and macroeconomic regimes before and after the crisis: A post-Keynesian view on Denmark, Estonia, and Latvia. Journal of Baltic Studies, 50(4), 435-465. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1080/01629778.2019.1680403
Edvinsson, R. (2014). The gross domestic product for Sweden within its present borders, 1620-2012. En R. Edvinsson, T. Jacobsson y D. Waldenström (eds.), House Prices, Stock Returns, National Accounts, and the Riksbank Balance Sheet, 1620-2012 (pp. 101-182). Estocolmo: Ekerlids.
Fagerberg, J., y Srholec, M. (2008). National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development. Research Policy, 37(9), 1417-1435. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.06.003
Fajnzylber, F. R. (1983). La industrialización trunca de América Latina. México: Nueva Imagen.
Freeman, C. (1995). The “National System of Innovation” in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5-24. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
Hall, P. E., y Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Hein, E. (2015). Finance-dominated capitalism and re-distribution of income: A Kaleckian perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39(3), 907-934. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bet038
Hein, E. (2023). Varieties of demand and growth regimes – post-Keynesian foundations. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, 20(3), 410-443. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2023.0103
Hein, E., Meloni, W. P., y Tridico, P. (2021). Welfare models and demand-led growth regimes before and after the financial and economic crisis. Review of International Political Economy, 28(5), 1196-1223. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1744178
Katzenstein, P. (1985). Small States in World Markets: Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Lundvall, B. Å. (2007). National innovation systems: Analytical concept and development tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), 95-119. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1080/13662710601130863
Lundvall, B. Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., y Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31(2), 213-231. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00137-8
Marglin, S. A., y Bhaduri, A. (1990). Profit squeeze and Keynesian theory. En S. Marglin y J. Schor (eds.), The Golden Age of Capitalism: Reinterpreting the Postwar Experience (pp. 153-186). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Marquetti, A. (2003). Analyzing historical and regional patterns of technical change from a classical-Marxian perspective. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 52(2), 191-200. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(03)00021-0
Ocampo, J. A. (2016). Balance-of-payments dominance: Implications for macroeconomic policy. En M. Damill, M. Rapetti y G. Rozenwurcel (eds.), Macroeconomics and Development: Roberto Frenkel and the Economies of Latin America (pp. 211-228). Nueva York: Columbia University Press.
Oreiro, J. L. (2005). Capital mobility, real exchange rate appreciation, and asset price bubbles in emerging economies: A Post Keynesian macroeconomic model for a small open economy. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 28(2), 317-344. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.2753/PKE0160-3477280208
Palley, T. (2013). Cambridge and neo-Kaleckian growth and distribution theory: Comparison with an application to fiscal policy. Review of Keynesian Economics 1(1), 79-104. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.4337/roke.2013.01.05
Pérez Caldentey, E., y Vernengo, M. (2022). Varieties of peripheral capitalism: The institutional foundations of economic backwardness. Review of Keynesian Economics, 10(2), 240-261. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.4337/roke.2022.02.06
Pinto, A. (1976). Notas sobre los estilos de desarrollo en América Latina. Revista de la CEPAL, (primer semestre), 97-128.
Piore, M. J. (2016). Varieties of capitalism theory. Politics & Society, 44(2), 237-241. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1177/003232921663805
Porcile, G. (2021). Latin-American structuralism and neo-structuralism. En L. Alcorta, N. Foster-McGregor, B. Verspagen y A. Szirmai (eds.), New Perspectives on Structural Change: Causes and Consequences of Structural Change in the Global Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porcile, G., y Sanchez-Ancochea, D. (2021). Institutional change and political conflict in a structuralist model. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 45(6), 1269-1296. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beab028
Rodríguez, O. (2007). El estructuralismo latinoamericano. México: Siglo XXI Editores.
Rodrik, D. (1998). Why do more open economies have bigger governments? Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997-1032. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1086/250038
Schneider, B. R. (2013). Hierarchical Capitalism in Latin America: Business, Labor, and the Challenges of Equitable Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Senghaas, D. (1985). The European Experience: A Historical Critique of Development Theory. Enskede, Suecia: TPB.
Setterfield, M., y Kim, Y. K. (2020). Varieties of capitalism, increasing income inequality and the sustainability of long-run growth. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 44(3), 559-582. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bez067
Stockhammer, E. (2022). Macroeconomic ingredients for a growth model analysis for peripheral economies: A post-Keynesian-structuralist approach. New Political Economy, 28(4), 628-645. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2022.2149723
Williamson, J. G. (2002). Land, labor, and globalization in the Third World, 1870-1940. Journal of Economic History, 62(1), 55-85. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050702044030