Search

This intervention responds to a series of articles—including one published in Antipode—on what is referred to as "new" state capitalism (NSC) or sometimes, simply, state capitalism. Our overarching argument is that by eliding state and institutionalist theory and, specifically, separating the analysis of state transformation from the power and leverage of social forces under late capitalism, NSC scholars end up offering an inaccurate, inchoate and incoherent conceptualisation and analysis of important phenomena. Our contention is that future work needs to return to socio‐relational analyses of the state, prioritising the power and leverage of social forces operating under patterns of accumulation characterised by more‐integrated‐than‐ever‐before global economic‐market relations and the concentration of productive and financial capital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In the past three decades, "policy entrepreneurship" has emerged as a key analytical concept helping to explain institutional and policy change. Despite this, however, the literature on policy entrepreneurship remains theoretically vexed, producing limited theoretical knowledge or explanatory models able to draw firm conclusions. Theory building on policy and institutional change, for example, how policy entrepreneurs institute and navigate change agendas, using what tools, strategies, resources, and capacities remains opaque. This is especially the case in developing country contexts, where most analytical investigation of policy entrepreneurship has addressed "first world" case examples. This special issue seeks to address this analytical gap in the literature, focusing on cases specific to developing country contexts, deepening our empirical knowledge of policy entrepreneurship in developing countries, but also exploring theoretical and conceptual debates as they relate to developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores attempts to construct 'regulatory capacity' in developing countries, focusing on the work of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and its role as an international standardsetting institution in regulatory governance. The article explores how the construction of specific forms of regulatory capacity, and attempts to orchestrate the adoption of regulatory reform agendas in emerging economies, reflect broader processes of political-policy transfer that impact state capacity and the ability of developing states to manage economic development. By analysing the OECD's engagement practices with third party organizations such as APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation organization) and ASEAN(theAssociation of SoutheastAsian Nations) and its specific engagement with emerging economies through country 'reviews' and 'audits', the author explores the implications for state capacity in terms of the adoption of regulatory systems of governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Infrastructure provision the world over has undergone a series of profound changes in the manner of its financing and governance over the last 30 years or so. While the role of the state has diminished as a direct provider, builder and operator of infrastructure, its role as regulator and overseer has undergone substantial growth, increasing the regulatory burden on the state. While this transition has occurred relatively smoothly in developed country contexts, in developing countries the diffusion of the regulatory state has produced manifestly different forms of governance, stressing the regulatory capacity of existing and newly formed regulatory bodies. This paper explores the impact and manifestations of regulatory diffusion in the context of the Thai energy sector and the governance mechanisms responsible for electricity generation, transmission and distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]