Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T06:23:22.825Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS AND THE “RUSSIAN CASE”: THE IMPACT OF RUSSIA’S REALITIES AND THINKERS IN THE MID-TWENTIETH-CENTURY DEBATE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2011

EZEQUIEL ADAMOVSKY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this article is to explore whether there is a relevant impact of the Russian case and of Russian economic thought on the twentieth-century Western debate on economic development. It is argued that things Russian continued to have an impact on this notion, similar to the one we have found for the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Russia’s historical experience provided an important standpoint from which to think and rethink the meaning of economic development. As in the previous centuries, Russia’s paradoxical presence—between Europe and Asia, backward but also modern, an “apprentice” who now claimed the position of a teacher—helped to spark new thinking. The resistance of some of her intellectuals and policy makers to accept the certainties of the mainstream of the economic science contributed to raise doubts regarding the validity of Western conceptual frameworks.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 527 - 550
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abalkin, L. 2001. “Rossiiskaia shkola ekonomicheskoi mysli: poisk samoopredeleniia.” Voprosy ekonomiki 2: 4–18.Google Scholar
Adamovsky, Ezequiel. 2010. “Before Development Economics: Western Political Economy, the “Russian Case” and the First Perceptions of Economic Backwardness (from the 1760s until the mid-19th Century).” Journal of the History of Economic Thought. 32 (3): 349–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcalde, Javier G. 1987. The Idea of Third World Development: Emerging Perspectives in the United States and Britain, 1900–1950. Lanham and London: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Arndt, H.D. 1987. Economic Development: The History of an Idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baran, Paul A. 1957. The Political Economy of Growth. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
Bardhan, Pranab. 1993. “Economics of Development and the Development of Economics. ” Journal of Economic Perspectives 7, 2 (Spring): 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Vincent. 1998. Kondratiev and the Dynamics of Economic Development: Long Cycles and Industrial Growth in Historical Context. London: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Vincent. 2001a. “Tugan-Baranovsky as a Pioneer of Trade Cycle Analysis.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 23 (4): 443–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Vincent. 2001b. “Calling up the Reserves: Keynes, Tugan-Baranovsky and Russian War Finance.” Europe-Asia Studies 53 (1): 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Vincent. 2008. “Russian Émigré Economists in the USA.”In Barnett, V. and Zweynert, J., eds., Economics in Russia: Studies in Intellectual History. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 107–122.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Henry, and Terence, Byres. 2001. “From Peasant Studies to Agrarian Change.” Journal of Agrarian Change 1 (1): pp. 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapple, Simon. 1995. “The Kaleckian Origins of the Keynesian Model.” Oxford Economic Papers 47: 525–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Colin G. 1939. A Critique of Russian Statistics. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Clark, Colin G. 1967. “A.V. Chayanov, The Theory of Peasant Economy.” [Review article]. Soviet Studies 19, 2 (Oct.): 292–293.Google Scholar
Dannequin, Fabrice, and Arnaud, Diemer. 1999. “L’économie de l’agriculture familiale de Chayanov à Nicholas Georgescù-Roegen.” Paper presented at the Colloque de la Société Française d’Economie Rurale, Paris, November 1999. Atwww.oeconomia.net/private/recherche/sferchayanov2000.pdf [access 20/12/2008].Google Scholar
Ekhtiar, Maryam. 1996. “An Encounter with the Russian Czar: The Image of Peter the Great in Early Qajar Historical Writings.” Iranian Studies 29 (1): 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellman, Michael. 2009. “What Did the Study of the Soviet Economy Contribute to Mainstream Economics?” Comparative Economic Studies 51 (1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar, Arturo. 1995. Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
FitzGerald, E.V.K. 1990. “Kalecki on Financing Development: an Approach to the Macroeconomics of the Semi-Industrialised Economy.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 14: 183–203.Google Scholar
Furtado, Celso. 1964. Development and Underdevelopment. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas. 1960. “Economic Theory and Agrarian Economics.” Oxford Economic Papers 12 (1): 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerschenkron, Aleksander. 1945. Economic Relations with the USSR. New York.Google Scholar
Gerschenkron, Aleksander. 1962. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Gerschenkron, Aleksander. 1970. Europe in the Russian Mirror. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gootenberg, Paul. 2000. “ Hijos of Dr. Gerschenkron: ‘Latecomer’ Conceptions in Latin American Economic History.” In Centeno, Miguel Angel and López-Alves, Fernando, eds., The Other Mirror: Grand Theory through the Lens of Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 55–80.Google Scholar
Gowdy, John, and Mesner, Susan. 1998. “The Evolution of Georgescu-Roegen’s Bioeconomics.” Review of Social Economy LVI (2): 136–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, Paul. 2009. “’The Soviet Agricultural Surplus: A Retrospective.” Europe-Asia Studies 61 (4): 669–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1959. The Strategy of Economic Development. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ho, A.S.W. 2006. “Analyzing and Arresting Uneven Development: Friedrich List and Gunnar Myrdal Compared.” Journal of Economic Issues 40 (2): 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoselitz, Bert. 1943. “Socialist Planning and International Economic Relations.” American Economic Review 33 (4).Google Scholar
Hoselitz, Bert. 1960. “Theories of Stages of Economic Growth.” In Hoselitz, B., ed., Theories of Economic Growth. New York: The Free Press, pp. 193–238.Google Scholar
Kitching, Gavin. 1989. Development and Underdevelopment in Historical Perspective: Populism, Nationalism and Industrialization. Second revised edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Levine, David P. 2001. “Political Economy and the Idea of Development.” Review of Political Economy 13 (4): 523–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, W. Arthur. 1955. The Theory of Economic Growth. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Love, Joseph L. 1996. Crafting the Third World: Theorizing Development in Rumania and Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazour, Anatole. 1975. Modern Russian Historiography, a revised edition. Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Nisbet, Robert A. 1969. Social Change and History: Aspects of the Western Theory of Development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nurkse, Ragnar. 1953. Problems of Capital Formation in Underdeveloped Countries. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reinert, Erik. 2005. “German Economics as Development Economics: From the Thirty Years’ War to World War II.” In Jomo, K.S. and Reinert, E., eds., The Origins of Development Economics: How Schools of Economic Thought Have Addressed Development. New Delhi and London: Tulika/Zed, pp. 48–68.Google Scholar
Rosenstein-Rodan, Paul. 1943. “Problems of Industrialisation of Eastern and South Eastern Europe.” The Economic Journal 53 (210–211): 202–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rostow, Walt W. 1953. The Dynamics of Soviet Society. London: Secker & Warburg.Google Scholar
Rostow, Walt W. 1990. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. Third edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schultz, Theodore W. 2008. “Autobiography.” At http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1979/schultz-autobio.html [access 27/11/2008].Google Scholar
Senghaas, Dieter. 1991. “Friedrich List and the Basic Problems of Modern Development.” Review (Fernand Braudel Center) 14 (3): 451–467.Google Scholar
Shanin, Teodor, ed. 1971. Peasants and Peasant Society. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Spengler, Joseph J. 1960. “John Stuart Mill on Economic Development.” In Hoselitz, B., ed., Theories of Economic Growth. New York: The Free Press, pp. 113–154.Google Scholar
Stanziani, Alessandro. 2004. “Čajanov, Kerblay et les šestidesjatniki: une histoire globale?” Cahiers du monde Russe 45 (3-4): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanziani, Alessandro. 2008. “Serfs, Slaves, or Wage Earners? The Legal Status of Labour in Russia from a Comparative Perspective, from the Sixteenth to the Nineteenth Century.” Journal of Global History 3: 183–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorner, Daniel. 1971. “Peasant Economy as a Category in Economic History.” In Shanin, Teodor, ed., Peasants and Peasant Society. Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp. 202–218.Google Scholar
Thorner, Daniel, Kerblay, Basile, and Smith, R.E.F., eds. 1966. A.V. Chayanov on the Theory of Peasant Economy. Homewood, IL: The American Economic Association.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wolf, Eric R. 1966. Peasants. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar