Issues of Soviet Participation in International Economic Institutions

Author(s):  
Catherine M. Sokil
2011 ◽  
pp. 67-90
Author(s):  
Maurizio Mistri

This paper analyses the forces at the base of the formation processes of international economic institutions following the fundamental New Institutional Economics (NIE) approach. In particular, the paper assumes that new international economic institutions respond to a principle of procedural rationality. This principle indicates that the formation of institutions takes place in an environment dominated by the bounded rationality of agents that produce institutions based on procedural knowledge accumulated over time. Particular attention is dedicated to the relationship between institutional innovation and economic growth. Specialized institutions stem from this relation, on par with the real economy, and generate more and more complex institutional systems. Within the institutionalist approach to the formation of institutions, the paper highlights Aoki's concepts on "institutionalized linkages" and "institutional complementarity"; these concepts are then correlated to Schelling's "strategy decomposition" concept; subsequently the forces that lead to institutional changes (Aoki and North) are analyzed. Specifically, in light of North's approach, conditions are analyzed that determine changes in institutions governing international trade relations deriving from changes in some structural dimensions such as relative price systems. These changes are possible since governments can renegotiate original agreements giving rise to compensations.


Author(s):  
A. Lampsi ◽  
◽  
◽  

The COVID-19 pandemiс has dealt a severe blow to economy of the post-Soviet countries. Measures undertaken by governments of the CIS countries for supporting national economies have been determined by a number of factors, and political reasons often were playing a role no less important than economic ones. As a result, the situation with supporting economy during the pandemiс clearly revealed similarities and differences not only in economic, but also in political systems of the CIS countries, their orientation towards certain international economic institutions, the level of self-sufficiency of economies, their dependence and interdependence from different directions of economic exchange.


Author(s):  
Lisa L. Martin

In a comparison of today’s global political economy with that of the last great era of globalization, the late nineteenth century, the most prominent distinction is be the high degree of institutionalization in today’s system. While the nineteenth-century system did have some important international institutions—in particular the gold standard and an emerging network of trade agreements—it had nothing like the scope and depth of today’s powerful international economic institutions. We cannot understand the functioning of today’s global political economy without understanding the sources and consequences of these institutions. Why were international organizations (IOs) such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) or International Monetary Fund (IMF) created? How have they gained so much influence? What difference do they make for the functioning of the global economy and the well-being of individuals around the world? In large part, understanding IOs requires a focus on the tension between the use of power, and rules that are intended to constrain the use of power. IOs are rules-based creatures. They create and embody rules for gaining membership, for how members should behave, for monitoring, for punishment if members renege on their commitments, etc. However, these rules-based bodies exist in the anarchical international system, in which there is no authority above states, and states continue to exercise power when it is in their self-interest to do so. While states create and join IOs in order to make behavior more rule-bound and predictable, the rules themselves reflect the global distribution of power at the time of their creation; and they only constrain to the extent that states find that the benefits of constraint exceed the costs of the loss of autonomy. The tension between rules and power shapes the ways in which international institutions function, and therefore the impact that they have on the global economy. For all their faults, international economic institutions have proven themselves to be an indispensable part of the modern global political economy, and their study represents an especially vibrant research agenda.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document