Market Economy and Conflict; Disjuncture between the Politics and Economics of Statebuilding in Afghanistan during 2001-2021

市场经济与冲突；

• 批准号: ES/X006832/1
• 金额: $ 13.01万
• 依托单位: School of Oriental and African Studies
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2022
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2022 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FX006832%2F1
• 关键词: Market; Economy; Conflict; Disjuncture; between

My PhD investigated the knowledge shaping private sector investments in manufacturing activities in a market economy that, meanwhile, suffered from political instability - taking post-2001 Afghanistan as a case. The research findings are unique because they bring forth the role of institutions rooted in social structures (religion and patriarchal family) where the individual motivation to invest was seen to have taken shape. Whether these investments were sufficient to develop manufacturing sector in a place like Afghanistan (2001-2018) is where my research contributes to the critical study of market-led development. I completed my PhD in July 2021 after minor corrections. Empirical evidence for this project was gathered through primary data collection in an extensive fieldwork in 2018. Research tools consisted of semi-structured interviews and field visits. In total, 51 manufacturing enterprises were researched which I personally visited to take field notes, observing all the production processes and sites.Research focus on manufacturing was warranted because Afghanistan's economy has been dominated by subsistence farming and illicit trade. Hence, growth of manufacturing activities could be a positive transformation, and would throw into relief the outcome of the economic policy implemented in Afghanistan during the study period - what I wished to examine in my research. The historical period under investigation is when market economy was adopted in Afghanistan as part of The United States led international coalition state institution (re-)building. The policy promoted private sector for undertaking productive resource allocation. This approach was reiterated in foundational policy documents and enshrined in article 10 of Afghanistan's post-2001 constitution.Globally, market-oriented policy in Afghanistan came in the context of a neo-institutionalist and neoliberal synthesis that was developed more coherently in the 1990s, thereafter adopted by the World Bank. My conceptual framework was adapted mostly from scratch because Afghanistan's economy had not been studied with a similar topic in mind. This framework emphasized on early 'socialization' to find out why individuals invested in manufacturing and whether their investments led to a significant role for this sector in the economy of Afghanistan. The findings suggest that: 1) investment choices were deeply rooted in embodied (informal) institutions, 2) internal organization of enterprises reproduced these institutions, notably the hierarchy in the patriarchal family, transmitting the inequities from one social domain to another, and 3) manufacturing sector remained structurally insignificant (i.e., in regards to how resources were allocated in the economy) based on deductive proxies. That is, the role manufacturing sector played in the economy remained marginal.Building on my PhD research, I plan to investigate the politics and economics of state-building in Afghanistan during 2002-2021 as a case of 'disjuncture' between the two domains. This research could explain some of the structural reasons as to why the state did not cope with the abrupt ceasing of external support and collapsed in August, 2021. Adoption of depoliticized market-oriented policy in Afghanistan in parallel to an anti-government insurgency - among other reasons that made Afghanistan politically unstable - is a curious problem for political economy. It is interesting to examine whether despite the challenges to the autonomy of market by security conditions, the economic policy remained unchanged. This topic has not been critically examined in the research on Afghanistan (2001-2021). The investigation of this topic will draw on my master's and doctoral research, aiming to study the limitations of market-oriented policy in a place like Afghanistan (2001-2018) despite arguably witnessing the inflow of unprecedented international assistance during the study period.

我的博士研究了在市场经济中，知识如何影响私营部门对制造业活动的投资，而与此同时，市场经济也遭受了政治不稳定——以2001年后的阿富汗为例。研究结果是独特的，因为它们提出了植根于社会结构（宗教和父权制家庭）的制度的作用，个人的投资动机被认为是在这些社会结构中形成的。这些投资是否足以在阿富汗（2001-2018）这样的地方发展制造业，是我的研究为市场主导发展的批判性研究做出贡献的地方。经过一些小的修改，我于2021年7月完成了博士学位。2018年，通过广泛的实地调查收集了主要数据，收集了该项目的经验证据。研究工具包括半结构化访谈和实地访问。总共调研了51家制造企业，我亲自走访并做了现场记录，观察了所有的生产流程和现场。研究重点放在制造业是有必要的，因为阿富汗的经济一直以自给农业和非法贸易为主。因此，制造业活动的增长可能是一种积极的转变，并将使在研究期间在阿富汗实施的经济政策的结果得到缓解-这是我希望在我的研究中检查的。所调查的历史时期是市场经济在阿富汗被采用的时期，这是美国领导的国际联盟国家制度（重建）建设的一部分。该政策促进私营部门承担生产性资源配置。这一方针在基本政策文件中得到重申，并载入2001年后阿富汗宪法第10条。在全球范围内，以市场为导向的阿富汗政策是在新制度主义和新自由主义的综合背景下制定的，这种综合在20世纪90年代得到了更连贯的发展，随后被世界银行采用。我的概念框架基本上是从零开始调整的，因为阿富汗的经济没有被研究过类似的主题。该框架强调早期“社会化”，以找出个人投资制造业的原因，以及他们的投资是否导致该部门在阿富汗经济中发挥重要作用。研究结果表明：1)投资选择深深植根于具体化（非正式）制度；2)企业内部组织复制了这些制度，特别是父权制家庭的等级制度，将不平等从一个社会领域转移到另一个社会领域；3)基于演绎代理，制造业在结构上仍然不重要（即，关于经济中资源如何分配）。也就是说，制造业在经济中所扮演的角色仍然处于边缘地位。在我的博士研究的基础上，我计划在2002年至2021年期间调查阿富汗国家建设的政治和经济，作为两个领域之间“脱节”的案例。这项研究可以解释为什么国家没有应对外部支持的突然停止，并于2021年8月崩溃的一些结构性原因。在阿富汗采取非政治化的市场导向政策的同时，反政府叛乱——以及其他导致阿富汗政治不稳定的原因——对政治经济学来说是一个奇怪的问题。有趣的是，尽管安全条件对市场的自主性提出了挑战，但经济政策是否保持不变。在阿富汗研究（2001-2021）中，这一主题尚未得到严格审查。本课题的调查将借鉴我的硕士和博士研究，旨在研究市场导向政策在阿富汗（2001-2018）这样的地方的局限性，尽管可以说在研究期间见证了前所未有的国际援助的流入。