国際経済

This paper is concerned with elucidating the role played by the international movement oflabour in the formation of the contemporary world economy.Differing from the 19th century, where migration built up a world-system based on the nation-state, current largescale patterns ofmigration from South to North reflect oscillations in the moderm world.Since 1960, the agrariansocieties of Less Developed Countries have been rapidly dissloved with the advance of the globalization and the result has been the formation of an expanded pool of labour-power robbed its traditional means of subsistence.Multinational corporations from highly industrialized countries have begun using this cheap labour power of the LDCs through either direct international investments or the employment of migrant workers. With this inexhaustible supply of labour-power inthe LDCs, the contemporary world has entered an era of a globalization of the labour marketbased on an extended racial division of labour.

抄録全体を表示

その現実と理論的解明の重要性にもかかわらず, 国際経済学の中では取り上げられることの少ない国際的労働力移動問題を中心にして, 「労働」に焦点を当てて共通論題に応えようとした伊豫谷報告の意義を, まずは高く評価したい。そして以下での質問は, 伊豫谷報告によって喚起されるところの, 新たな検討課題の提起でもある。

抄録全体を表示

The central concept to understand“a new triad of aid, development, and environment”shouldbe development.“Aid without development”or“environment without development”can notcatch the complex issues of today.The most difficult problem to solve environmental issues liesin the fact that the people who get the benefits of development and the people who pay the cost ofdevelopment belong to each different groups. The most difficult problem of“development andenvironment”arises from the changing distribution among groups during the course of development.This problem will be reduced to that of options of development strategies.
This paper looks back the history of ideas of development economics to find out what kind ofdevelopment strategies have been advocated by structuralism, neo-classical economics, andreformism and what kind of lessons we can get from each approach. Finally, I point out someissues to address in future to understand“a new triad”.

抄録全体を表示

抄録を表示する抄録を非表示にする

Over nine years have passed since the collapse of the socialist system in 1989.When assessingthe empirical evidence in macroeconomic performance of transition economies, growth in GDPand successful macroeconomic stabilisation can be observed in almost all countries.In addition, despite the expression of dissatisfaction by populations in election time, no major policy reversalhas taken place.However, experience with transition from planned to market economies has varied greatly across the countries and the differences imply the influence of specific determinantssuch as starting conditions, historical tradition, political constraints, the stability of the government, the strength of the geopolitical factors, the degree of public tolerance and support forreforms.
Transition in Europe essentially represents a restructuring of the international relationships after the Cold War and a shift from the Soviet block to the club of Western nations.Though access tothe EU needs dramatic liberalisation and stabilisation, the difference in transition influences thestrategy of trade policy and subregional integration.Therefore, one may observe protectionism notonly in transition economies but also in the EU.
Taking into account the internal determinants for transition, accession to the EU and reorganisation of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) relation, transition has created a marketeconomy including specific characteristics of each country which requires its own economic policy based on the emerging institutions rather than the orthodox liberalisation policy based on socalled“Washington consensus”.

抄録全体を表示

PDF形式でダウンロード (2119K)

J-STAGEへの登録はこちら（無料）