SFeDu
of.211, Gorgoko St., 88 
Rostov-on-Don
Russia
344002
+7 (863) 250-59-54
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
te@sfedu.ru

TERRA ECONOMICUS

  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2019
  • No 1
  • Western and non-Western economic institutional models in time and geographical space

WESTERN AND NON-WESTERN ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONAL MODELS IN TIME AND GEOGRAPHICAL SPACE

TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 17 (no. 1),

Citation: Kirdina-Chandler, S. G. (2019). Western and non-Western economic institutional models in time and geographical space. Terra Economicus, 17(1), 8–23. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-1-8-23

With growing doubts about the universality of Western institutional models, there is now more attention paid to the analysis of models that are developing beyond the “western world”. This paper is devoted to a comparative analysis of countries with either predominant Western or non-Western institutional models of the economy. An overview of studies in political economy, as well as the main more modern institutional theories about similar subjects, are presented. The paper focuses mainly on the approach developed in the author’s theory of X- and Y-institutional matrices (Kirdina, 2014 [2001; 2000]; Kirdina-Chandler, 2017). In this theory, Western institutional models are characterised by the predominance of a set of Y-matrix institutions, among them the institutions of a market economy, federal political structure, and individualistic ideology. Non-Western models are distinguished by the dominance of a set of X-matrix institutions, among them the institutions of a redistributive economy, unitary-centralised political structure, and communitarian ideology. The X-and-Y-institutional matrices theory was used as the methodological basis for two research projects carried out in 2014–2017, the results of which are presented in the paper. The first project was devoted to analysing the influence of geographic/climatic factors on the development of institutional models. A reliable statistical relationship between the extremes of geographic/climatic factors and the predominant institutional model – the western (less extreme) and the non-western (more extreme) – is identified and logically justified. The second project was to study the long-term dynamics (since 1820) of the coexistence of countries with Western and non-Western models. A cyclical process of changing world economic leadership, expressed in the share of GDP produced by each group of countries in the world GDP, was revealed. Prior to the spread of the industrial revolution, countries with non-Western institutional models dominated in the world GDP. Since the 1870’s the domination of Y-countries started, which began to produce more than half of the world GDP. The biggest gap between these two groups of countries was observed in 1950–1970 but following this period it began to decline. Since 2008/2010 X-countries began outperforming Y-countries by share of world GDP, and this advantage is gradually increasing. It is hypothesised that a change of dominance in the global economic configuration and the search for new coalitions are some of the main factors for the increase in radical sentiment in the world and international tension.


Keywords: mesolevel analysis; x-and-y-institutional matrices theory; east and west; economic institutional models; evolutionary approach; comparative analysis of economic systems; world economic order

References:
  • Abrutyn, S., and Lawrence, K. (2010). From Chiefdom to State: Toward an Integrative Theory of the Evolution of Polity // Sociological Perspectives, 53(3), 419–442.
  • Acemoglu, D., and Robinson, J. (2012). Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosper-ity, and poverty. New York: Crown Business.
  • Arslanov, V. V. (2016). Geografiya, instituty i istoki global’nogo neravenstva: kritika koncepcii ehkonomicheskogo razvitiya Adzhemoglu i Robinsona. [Geography, institutions and the roots of global inequality: a critical appraisal of Acemoglu and Robinson’s theory of economic development.] Moscow: Moscow: Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian.)
  • Diamond, J. (2012). What makes countries rich or poor? // New York Review of Books, June 7 (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2012/06/07/what-makes-countries-rich-or-poor/ – Accessed on April 8, 2017).
  • Eucken W. (1989) [1939]. Die Grundlagen der Nationalökonomie. Berlin: Springer.
  • Eucken, W. (1992) [1939]. The Foundations of Economics – History and Theory in the Analysis of Economic Reality. Berlin, New York: Springer. (Reprint of the first English edi-tion published in 1950 by William Hodge, London).
  • Frank A.G. (1998) ReORIENT: Global Economy in the Asian Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Gallup, J. L., Sachs, J., and Mellinger, A. (1999). Geography and Economic Development // International Regional Science Review, 22, 179–232.
  • Hausmann, R., Pritchett, L., and Rodrik, D. (2005). Growth Accelerations // Journal of Economic Growth, 10(4), 303–329.
  • Institutsional’nykh matrits teoriya [Institutional Matrix Theory], pp. 153–154 / In: G. V. Osipov, L. N. Moskvichev (eds.) (2010). Sociologicheskij slovar’. [Sociological diction-ary.] Moscow: INFRA-M Publ. (In Russian.)
  • Kasai, T. (2017). Karl Polanyi’s Criticism of Economics and the Origin of His Poor-Relief Ideas // Paper presented at AFEE’s 2017 annual meeting, Chicago, Illinois, January 6–8, 2017.
  • Kirdina, S. G. (2008). Sovremennye sociologicheskie teorii: aktual’noe protivostoya-nie? [Contemporary sociological theories: current confrontation?] // Sociologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological research], (8), 18–28. (In Russian.)
  • Kirdina, S. G. (2014) [2000; 2001]. Institucional’nye matricy i razvitie Rossii. Vvedenie v X-Y-teoriyu. [Institutional Matrices and Development in Russia: An Introduction to Х&Y Theory.] Moscow, Saint Petersburg: Nestor Istoria, 468 p. (In Russian.)
  • Kirdina, S. G. (2016). Rol institutov i geografii v ehkonomicheskom razvitii: aktual’naya polemika v geterodoksal’noj ehkonomike [Institutions and geography in economic devel-opment: a heterodox economic discussion] // Prostranstvennaya ekonomika. [Spatial Eco-nomics], (3), 133–150. (In Russian.)
  • Kirdina, S. G., Kuznetsova, A. V., and Senko, O. V. (2015). Klimat I instituzionalynye matrizy [Climate and Institutional Matrices: Cross-Country Analysis] // Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya [Sociological Studies], (9), 3–13. (In Russian.)
  • Kirdina-Chandler, S. (2017). Institutional Matrices Theory, or X-and Y-theory: A Re-sponse to F. Gregory Hayden // Journal of Economic Issues, 51(2), 476 –485.
  • Kirdina-Chandler, S. G. (2017а). Mezouroven’: novyj vzglyad na ehkonomiku? [The Meso Level: A New Look in Economics?] // Nauchnyj doklad. [Working paper.]Мoscow: Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 36 р. (In Russian.)
  • Kirdina-Chandler, S. G. (2017b). Radikal’nyj institucionalizm i fejkovaya ehkonomika v XXI veke [Radical institutional economics and fakery for the 21st century] // Journal of Institutional Studies, 9(4), 6–15. (In Russian.)
  • Kirilyuk, I. L., Volynsky, A. I., Kruglova, M. S., Kuznetsova, A. V., Rubinstein, A. A., and Senko, O. V. (2015). Empiricheskaya proverka teorii instituzionalynykh matriz metodami intellektualynogo analiza dannykh. [Empirical Testing of Institutional Matrices Theory by Data Mining] // Kompyuternye Issledovaniya i Modelirovanie [Computer Research and Modeling], 7(4), 923–933. (In Russian.)
  • Kornai, J. (1980). Economics of Shortage, vols. I and II. Amsterdam and New York: NorthHolland Publishing Company.
  • Lorenz, A., Hemmer, H.-R., and Ahlfeld, S. (2005). The Economic Growth Debate – Ge-ography Versus Institutions: Is There Anything Really New? // Entwicklungsökonomische Diskussionsbeiträge – Discussion Papers in Development Economics, No. 34, 19 р.
  • Maddison Project Database (2018) (https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/releases/maddison-project-database-2018 – Accessed on March 26, 2018).
  • Malik, A., and Temple, J. R. W. (2006). The Geography of Output Volatility // CEPR Dis-cussion Papers 5516, pp. 1–39.
  • Marx, K. (1939). Grundrisse der Kritik der Polititischen Oekonomie. Moscow: Institute of Marx-ism-Leninism of Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. (In Russian.)
  • Matritsa institutsional’naya v sociologii. [The institutional matrix in sociology.], pp. 609–610 / In: Sociologicheskaya ehnciklopediya [Sociological Encyclopedia.]. (2003). Vol. 1. Moscow: Mysl Publ. (In Russian.)
  • Mellinger, A. D., Sachs, J. D., and Gallup, J. L. (2000). Climate, Coastal Proximity, and Development, pp. 169–194 / In: G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, and M. S. Gertler (Eds.) The Ox-ford Handbook of Economic Geography. Oxford University Press.
  • Nekipelov, A. D. (2017). «Novyj pragmatizm» professora G. Kolodko: al’ternativa ili dopolnenie chistoj ehkonomicheskoj teorii? [«New pragmatism» of professor G. Kolodko: alternative or addition to pure economic theory?] // Voprosy teoreticheskoj ehkonomiki [Theoretical economics], (1), 22–39. (In Russian.)
  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cam-bridge: Cambridge Univer. Press.
  • North, D., Wallis, J., and Weingast, B. (2009). Violence and Social Order: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Parent, O., and Zouache, A. (2009). Geographical Features vs. Institutional Factors: New Perspectives on the Growth of Africa and Middle-East // Economic Research Forum. Work-ing Paper No 490, 30 р.
  • Parent, O., and Zouache, A. (2012) Geography Versus Institutions: New Perspectives on the Growth of Africa and the Middle East // Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Eco-nomics, 168(3), 488–518.
  • Plummer, P., and Sheppard, E. (2006). Geography Matters: Agency, Structures and Dy-namics at the Intersection of Economics and Geography // Journal of Economic Geography, 6(5), 619–637.
  • Polanyi, K. (1963). Economic Sociology in the United States: Lecture given at the Insti-tute for Cultural Relations, Budapest, Oct 9, 1963. Op. cit:
  • Polanyi, K. (1977). The Livelihood of Man. N.-Y. Academic Press, Inc.
  • Polanyi, K. (1977). The Livelihood of Man (Studies in Social Discontivity). N.-Y.: Aca-demic Press, Inc.
  • Polterovich, V. M. (2017). Razrabotka strategij social’no-ehkonomicheskogo razvitiya: nauka vs ideologiya [Designing the strategies for socio-economic development: science vs. ideology] // Voprosy teoreticheskoj ehkonomiki [Theoretical economics], (1), 55–65. (In Russian.)
  • Reinert, E. (2013). Ob aktual’nosti global’nogo kejnsianstva i vyborochnoj deglobaliza-cii. [Zeitgeist in transition: towards global Keynesianism and selective deglobalization.] // Finansy i real’nyj sektor: vzaimodejstvie i konkurenciya. Materialy IX mezhdunarodnogo simpoziuma po ehvolyucionnoj ehkonomike, 8–10 sentyabrya 2011 g., Rossiya, Moskovska-ya oblast’, g. Pushchino. [Finance and the real sector: interaction and competition. Proceed-ings of the 9th International Symposium on the Evolutionary Economy, September 8–10, 2011, Russia, Moscow Region, Pushchino.] / V. I. Maevsky and S. G. Kirdina (eds.). Moscow: Institute of Economics, RAS. (In Russian.)
  • Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2013). Do Institutions Matter for Regional Development? // Re-gional Studies, 47(7), 1034–1047.
  • Rodrik, D. (2003). In Search of Prosperity: Analytical Narratives on Economic Growth. Princeton University Press, 481 р.
  • Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., and Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions Over Geography and Integration in Economic Development // Journal of Eco-nomic Growth, 2(9), 131–165.
  • Rosefielde, S. (2008a) [2005, 2002]. Comparative Economic Systems: Culture, Wealth, and Power in the 21st Century. Malden, Massachusetts & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Rosefielde, S. (2008b) [2005, 2002]. Sravnitel’naya ehkonomika stran mira. Kul’tura, bogatstvo i vlast’ v XXI veke. [Comparative Economic Systems: Culture, Wealth, and Power in the 21st Century.] Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian.)
  • Sachs, J. D. (2003a). Institutions Don’t Rule: Direct Effects of Geography on Per Capita Income // NBER. Working Paper No. 9490, 12 p.
  • Sachs, J. D. (2003b). Institutions Matter, but Not for Everything: The Role of Geogra-phy and Resource Endowments in Development Shouldn’t be Underestimated // Finance and Development, 40(2), 38–41.
  • Saha, B. (2013) Institutions or Geography: Which Matters Most for Economic Develop-ment? // Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 25(1–2), 69–89.
  • Frank, A. G., and Gills, B. K. (Eds.) (1998). The World System: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousands? London and New York: Routledge.
  • Venediktov, A. V. (1948). Gosudarstvennaya socialicticheskaya sobstvennost’. [State So-cialist Property]. Moscow-Leningrad: Publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences. (In Russian.)
  • Voeykov, M. (2017). K probleme social’no-ehkonomicheskogo neravenstva: ehkonomi-cheskoe i social’noe [To the problems of socio-economic inequality: social and economic] // Voprosy teoreticheskoj ehkonomiki [Theoretical economics], (1), 8–22. (In Russian.)
  • Wittfogel, K. A. (1959). Oriental despotism: A comparative study of total power. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
Publisher: Southern Federal University
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606