National Growth Models and Global Capitalism: a Critique of Comparative Political Economy

Abstract This theoretical article offers a critical perspective on the stagnationist and methodologically nationalist foundations of the growth model approach in comparative political economy. Going back to Bhaduri and Marglin’s foundational work, we examine its stagnationist roots, focusing on the causal mechanisms that link national aggregate demand, profit, and investment, which create a congruence between capitalist accumulation and national economic growth. We contrast these stagnationist assumptions with recent research on the transnational accumulation strategies of firms, which escape the stagnationist logic. Subsequently, we show how the growth model approach, more implicitly than explicitly, adopts many of the stagnationist assumptions of the Neo-Kaleckian model in its creation of a typology based on national aggregate demand components, thereby also subscribing to a methodological nationalism that inadequately captures contemporary global accumulation dynamics. Consequently, we argue that comparative political economy studies need to emphasize the theorization of the changing logic of capitalist accumulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asian international studies review
Published
2024-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/2667078x-bja10037
Primary Topic
Economic Growth and Productivity
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

National Growth Models and Global Capitalism: a Critique of Comparative Political Economy

Robert Pauls, Thomas Kalinowski
Asian international studies review
Economic Growth and Productivity
article

National Growth Models and Global Capitalism: a Critique of Comparative Political Economy

Robert Pauls, Thomas Kalinowski
article en

Abstract

Abstract This theoretical article offers a critical perspective on the stagnationist and methodologically nationalist foundations of the growth model approach in comparative political economy. Going back to Bhaduri and Marglin’s foundational work, we examine its stagnationist roots, focusing on the causal mechanisms that link national aggregate demand, profit, and investment, which create a congruence between capitalist accumulation and national economic growth. We contrast these stagnationist assumptions with recent research on the transnational accumulation strategies of firms, which escape the stagnationist logic. Subsequently, we show how the growth model approach, more implicitly than explicitly, adopts many of the stagnationist assumptions of the Neo-Kaleckian model in its creation of a typology based on national aggregate demand components, thereby also subscribing to a methodological nationalism that inadequately captures contemporary global accumulation dynamics. Consequently, we argue that comparative political economy studies need to emphasize the theorization of the changing logic of capitalist accumulation.

Asian international studies reviewVol. 25(2)
Ewha Womans University (KR), Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (CN)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Economic Growth and Productivity
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.