Beyond Predatory Productivism? : The Political Economy of Welfare Capitalism in Post-New Order Indonesia

Asia Review ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Andrew Rosser ◽  
Maryke Van Diermen ◽  
Jong-Ho Choi
2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Wenzelburger

There has been little comparative policy research hitherto on the substantial differences in law and order policies between Western industrialised countries. Instead, criminologists have filled this void and used concepts such as Esping-Andersen's worlds of welfare or Lijphart's patterns of democracy to interpret cross-country variation. However, the state of the art has two weaknesses: it almost exclusively relies on imprisonment data as dependent variable and it remains silent as to why welfare state regimes or types of democracy should be responsible for similarities in law and order policies. The present article tackles these shortcomings by (1) examining differences and commonalities in law and order policies in twenty Western industrialised countries and by (2) investigating whether the clustering of countries is associated with features of the welfare state or the political system. We find three distinct clusters and show that their formation is related to the characteristics of the political economy of the countries.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Rakhmat Syarip

This paper discusses determining factors behind Indonesia’s deindustrialization in the post-New Order era. Over time, manufacturing sector shows decreasing contribution to Indonesia’s GDP, while industrial transformation stagnates with limited high-technology exports. Using Linda Weiss’ (1998) Governed Interdependence and Christopher Dent’s (2003) Adaptive Partnership theories, this paper offers political-economy arguments to explain the phenomenon. Internationally speaking, while it is true that neoliberal globalization imposes some restrictions, it is too much to claim the death of industrial policy. Rather, it is the limitation of domestic institutions that is best explained Indonesia’s case. Using automotive, rattan and copper industries as case studies, the argument consists of two parts. First, in post-New Order Indonesia there is insufficient coordination between state and capital (both foreign and domestic). Second, the state in Indonesia lacks sufficient administrative capacity. The paper recommends Indonesia to invest in domestic institution as a means to reindustrialize.


Author(s):  
Fachry Ali

A central bank should be performing in the political-economy arena that so often is in situation between conflict and harmony. Because of that, it's not surprising that we often catch a fact that not only the mone- tary policies are theoretically drawn with technical calculations in which it would be more frequently evaluated politically, but also the authority of political authoritarianism so often suspect the motivation behind the mo- netary policy, and hence tend to control it.The experience of central bank in Indonesia under the transition from New Order to Reformasi era could become the historical lesson for our state and society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document