WIDER Advisory Group on International Economic Issues

(A research and training centre of the United Nations University

Drivers of Change or Cut-Throat Competitors? Challenging Cultures of Innovation of Chinese and Nigerian Migrant Entrepreneurs in West Africa

L'afflux remarquable des entrepreneurs migrants chinois dans différents pays d'Afrique occidentale au cours des dernières années a été heurtée à une résistance de plus en plus farouche par des entrepreneurs locaux établis. Que le premiers ont un avantage concurrentiel sur ce dernier en raison de traits socio-culturels distinctifs, ou si l'efficacité supposée chinoise est juste une caractéristique de toutes les diasporas mercantiles, est ouvert à la question. Cette étude exploratoire des migrants entrepreneuriales chinois et nigérians au Ghana et au Bénin tente de répondre à cette question. Apparemment, les forces culturels des agents du changement migrants ne sont pas limités à des systèmes de valeurs héritées ou religions, comme une éthique protestante ou le confucianisme, mais ils sont adaptés en permanence et ont inventé de nouveau par des réseaux transnationaux de la migration dans un monde globalisé. Il n'y a aucune preuve d'une prétendue supériorité de la culture d’innovation chinois par rapport aux cultures d’innovation africains des migrants entrepreneuriales. Plutôt, il existe une capacité accrue d'innovation d'une diaspora mercantile en général vis à vis des entrepreneurs locaux, indépendamment de l'origine de la culture nationale dans lequel il est intégré. En outre, la rivalité des entrepreneurs migrants chinois et nigérians dans les marchés africains ne conduit pas nécessairement à la concurrence coupe-gorge souvent suspectée sous l'impact de la mondialisation. Souvent, les deux groupes agissent plutôt complémentaires. Cela contribue, sous certaines conditions, même à la réduction de la pauvreté dans le pays d'accueil

Inconvenient glow: Cliometrics and the "golden age" of capitalism

This paper aims to criticize the recent cliometrics literature on the so-called "golden age" of capitalism. The works of Nicholas Crafts, Gianni Toniolo, and Barry Eichengreen are reconstructed in order to reveal the main characteristics of this research program. Its narrow quantitative focus, its reliance on theoretical propositions borrowed from neoclassical economics, and its auspicious interpretation of the postwar reconstruction are the main focus of the criticism presented. Finally, the cliometricians' attempt to historicize the "golden age" and de-historicize the following decades is related to the ideological understanding of the recent decades as a period of "great moderation."

The Global Financial Crisis and a New Capitalism?

The 2008 global financial crisis was the consequence of the process (1) of financialization, or the creation of massive fictitious financial wealth, that began in the 1980s,; and (2) the hegemony of a reactionary ideology-namely, neoliberalism-based on self-regulated and efficient markets. Although laissez-faire capitalism is intrinsically unstable, the lessons of the 1929 stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s were transformed into theories and institutions or regulations that led to the '30 glorious years of capitalism' (1948-77) and that could have helped avoid a financial crisis as profound as the present one. But it did not, because a coalition of rentiers and 'financists' achieved hegemony and, while deregulating the existing financial operations, refused to regulate the financial innovations that made these markets even riskier. Neoclassical economics played the role of a meta-ideology as it legitimized, mathematically and 'scientifically,' neoliberal ideology and deregulation. From this crisis a new democratic capitalist system will emerge, though its character is difficult to predict. It will not be financialized, but the glory years' tendencies toward a global and knowledge-based capitalism in which professionals have more say than rentier capitalists, as well as the tendency to improve democracy by making it more social and participative, will be resumed

Raising Keynes: A General Theory for the 21st century

Keynes’s General Theory argues there is no self-regulating mechanism that guarantees full employment. Keynes’s vision has been distorted by mainstream Keynesians to mean that it is the warts on the body of capitalism, not capitalism itself, that are the problem: frictions and imperfections and rigidities may interfere with the mechanism for self-regulation that inheres in the perfectly competitive model. This distortion has two supposed corollaries, first, that the more the economy resembles the textbook model of perfect competition, the less likely are lapses from full employment; second, that since imperfections are limited to the short run, so are lapses from full employment.Keynes was unable to convince the economics profession that the problem is capitalism; that the warts, real though they are, obscure a more fundamental problem. The reason is that Keynes lacked the mathematical tools to substantiate his vision. This paper deploys tools that were unavailable to Keynes, in order to lay the foundations of a Keynesian macroeconomics for the 21st century. Keywords: Keynes, Dynamic vs static models, Flexprice adjustment, Fixprice adjustment, JEL codes: B22, B41, E1