Financialization under state capitalism: steering capital markets in the BRICSS

国家资本主义下的金融化：引导金砖五国资本市场

• 批准号: 446618653
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Andreas Nölke
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Institut für Politikwissenschaft
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/446618653?language=en
• 关键词: Financialization; under; state; capitalism; steering

The role of capital markets in economic development has increased significantly with an increasing financialization in recent decades. At the same time, the role of the state and governmental steering of capital markets are hardly discussed in the financialization debate in the social sciences; Seen from this angle, the latter has a "hollow core". Mostly, the functioning of capital markets is automatically assumed to largely correspond to those in the ideal type of liberal capitalism. Capital markets appear as homogeneous entities, analytically separated from the state and following a neoliberal paradigm that hardly knows any state control and governmental steering. However, an analysis of Chinese capital markets has shown that the latter function quite differently in state-capitalist systems, fulfil different socio-economic roles and lead to different social consequences than the liberal ideal type. There is also evidence from other major emerging markets - and in some cases from Western industrialised countries – that these deviate from the liberal model. In view of the growing importance of large emerging markets in global capitalism, the question therefore arises whether the discussion of financialisation not only has a "hollow core", but also starts from an understanding of capital markets that is empirically outdated and overly homogenizing.To answer this question, the project first develops an alternative ideal type of "state-capitalist" capital markets that stands in contrast the neoliberal ideal type. Based on these two ideal types, the project engages in a comparative analysis of the capital markets of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and South Korea (BRICSS). These countries are not only among the economically and politically most important emerging markets, they also have dynamically growing capital markets. Moreover, each of these countries indicates a higher degree of state capitalist elements in their economy, regardless of democratic or authoritarian regime type. This comparative analysis, for which we have developed an analytical toolkit combining statistical data, document analysis, expert interviews and participation in financial market conferences, intends to show the extent to which the capital markets of these countries tend towards the neoliberal or state-capitalist ideal type. Building on this analysis, the third sub-goal investigates the implications of differently managed capital markets, on the one hand with respect to economic development at the national level and on the other hand with respect to the global financial architecture.Our project aims not only to provide a more empirically and theoretically solid basis for the financialization literature, but also to assess whether the rise of these (at least partially) state-capitalist emerging markets will lead to a challenge of the liberal order in the field of capital markets.

近几十年来，随着金融化程度的提高，资本市场在经济发展中的作用显著增强。与此同时，在社会科学的金融化争论中，国家和政府对资本市场的引导作用几乎没有被讨论；从这个角度看，后者有一个“空心的核心”。大多数情况下，资本市场的运作被自动地假定为与自由资本主义的理想类型大体相符。资本市场似乎是同质的实体，在分析上与国家分离，遵循一种几乎不知道任何国家控制和政府指导的新自由主义范式。然而，对中国资本市场的分析表明，后者在国家资本主义制度下的功能完全不同，履行不同的社会经济角色，并导致与自由主义理想类型不同的社会后果。来自其他主要新兴市场的证据——在某些情况下来自西方工业化国家——也表明，这些国家偏离了自由模式。鉴于大型新兴市场在全球资本主义中日益重要，因此出现了这样一个问题：关于金融化的讨论是否不仅有一个“空洞的核心”，而且还始于对资本市场的理解，这种理解在经验上已经过时，而且过于同质化。为了回答这个问题，该项目首先发展了一种与新自由主义理想类型相对立的“国家资本主义”资本市场的替代理想类型。基于这两种理想类型，本项目对巴西、俄罗斯、印度、中国、南非和韩国（金砖国家）的资本市场进行了比较分析。这些国家不仅在经济和政治上都是最重要的新兴市场，它们还拥有动态增长的资本市场。此外，这些国家中的每一个都表明其经济中国家资本主义因素的程度较高，无论民主政体还是专制政体类型。我们为此开发了一个分析工具包，将统计数据、文件分析、专家访谈和参与金融市场会议相结合，旨在显示这些国家的资本市场在多大程度上倾向于新自由主义或国家资本主义理想类型。在此分析的基础上，第三个子目标调查了不同管理的资本市场的影响，一方面与国家层面的经济发展有关，另一方面与全球金融架构有关。我们的项目不仅旨在为金融化文献提供更加实证和理论上的坚实基础，而且还旨在评估这些（至少部分）国家资本主义新兴市场的兴起是否会导致资本市场领域的自由秩序面临挑战。