scholarly journals State capital in a geoeconomic world: mapping state-led foreign investment in the global political economy

Author(s):  
Milan Babic
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Gertz

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, several states introduced and expanded regulatory frameworks for screening (and potentially blocking) inward foreign direct investment. This shift accelerated a preexisting trend in the global political economy, as states have been widening their understanding of “national security” risks arising from foreign investment. The result is that such screening mechanisms are evolving from a niche subject to a broader regulatory tool that touches an expanding share of global economic activity. The tensions inherent in this shift—including how firms will respond, how states can evaluate systemic (rather than transactional) risk, and the potential and limits of international cooperation in investment screening—have not yet been resolved.


2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad Christerson

This paper integrates the concept of “embeddedness” from economic sociology into the global political economy perspective in order to understand the effects of foreign investment on development. 604 foreign invested enterprises in China are used to test whether or not foreign investment that is embedded in ethnic ties leads to more positive development outcomes than those produced by investment not embedded in these institutions. The analysis concludes that foreign investment that is embedded in ethnic ties leads to greater linkages to local firms and more high-value activities being transferred to the investee nation. The article concludes by arguing for a greater integration of the economic sociology and global political economy literatures.


2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (184) ◽  
pp. 423-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina Dietz ◽  
Bettina Engels ◽  
Oliver Pye

This article explores the spatial dynamics of agrofuels. Building on categories from the field of critical spatial theory, it shows how these categories enable a comprehensive analysis of the spatial dynamics of agrofuels that links the macro-structures of the global political economy to concrete, place-based struggles. Four core socio-spatial dynamics of agrofuel politics are highlighted and applied to empirical findings: territorialization, the financial sector as a new scale of regulation, place-based struggles and transnational spaces of resources and capital flows.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 399-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
In Song Kim ◽  
Iain Osgood

We survey the literature on firms as primary actors in trade politics. In contrast with prevailing approaches, firm-centered models predict that trade internally divides industries and that larger firms are the strongest advocates for globalization. This new preference map alters extant predictions about the dynamics of interest group contestation over trade and suggests revised accounts for how political organization and institutions contribute to an open international order. We also explore the potential for new insights into the operation of the global trade regime, the politics of foreign investment, immigration and capital movements, and exchange rates. Poli-tical activities undertaken by firms are important areas for further research in international political economy: Their economic engagements directly affect the movement of goods, services, capital, and people across the globe.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (04) ◽  
pp. 739-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna M. Agathangelou

International relations (IR) feminists have significantly impacted the way we analyze the world and power. However, as Cynthia Enloe points out, “there are now signs—worrisome signs—that feminist analysts of international politics might be forgetting what they have shared” and are “making bricks to construct new intellectual barriers. That is not progress” (2015, 436). I agree. The project/process that has led to the separation/specialization of feminist security studies (FSS) and feminist global political economy (FGPE) does not constitute progress but instead ends up embodying forms of violence that erase the materialist bases of our intellectual labor's divisions (Agathangelou 1997), the historical and social constitution of our formations as intellectuals and subjects. This amnesiac approach evades our personal lives and colludes with those forces that allow for the violence that comes with abstraction. These “worrisome signs” should be explained if we are to move FSS and FGPE beyond a “merger” (Allison 2015) that speaks only to some issues and some humans in the global theater.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document