NEOKLASİK PARADİGMA OLARAK WASHİNGTON/POST WASHİNGTON UZLAŞISININ YÜKSELİŞİ VE DÜŞÜŞÜ: POST-KEYNEZYEN ALTERNATİF YAKLAŞIM
Year 2015,
Volume: 24 Issue: 2, 247 - 262, 31.10.2015
Yelda Tekgül
,
Mehmet Fatih Cin
Abstract
1989 yılında kalkınma iktisatçısı Williamson tarafından “Washington Uzlaşısı” olarak adlandırılan neoliberal bir politika paketi gündeme gelmiştir. Bu paket başta Latin Amerika ülkelerine yönelik politika düzenlemeleri için kullanılmış daha sonra diğer yeni gelişen ekonomiler ve piyasa ekonomisine geçmeye çalışan eski sosyalist ülkelerde uygulamaya sokulmuştur. Washington Uzlaşısı aynı zamanda alternatif politikalar içeren “Anti-Washington Uzlaşısı” sürecini de kendi içerisinde başlatmıştır. Williamson'un ortaya attığı Washington Uzlaşısı dışa açılma, iç serbestleşme ve serbest piyasa gibi neoklasik önermeleri içermektedir. Uygulama sonuçları farklı tartışmaları da gündeme getirmiştir. Bu tartışmalar genelde Washington politikalarının başarılı sonuçlar vermediği üzerine odaklanmıştır. Eleştiriler sonucunda sonradan Post-Washington politikaları geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada amaçlanan Post-Keynezyen iktisat yaklaşımı çerçevesinde Washington ve Post-Washington uygulamalarına yönelik eleştirileri ele almak ve gelişmekte olan ülkelere yönelik farklı bir yaklaşım sunabilmektir.
References
- Akçay, Ü. ve Türkay, M (2009), “Neoliberalizmden Kalkınmacı Yaklaşıma: Devletin Sermaye Birikimi Sürecindeki Yeri Üzerine”, Sermaye Birikimi, Kalkınma, Azgelişmişlik, SAV Yayınları, İstanbul.
Arestis,P. (2004), Washington Consensus and Financial Liberalization , Journal of Post Keynesian Economics , 27(2): 251-271
Arestis, ve Sawyer, M. New Economics as Mainstream Economics, içinde, “Economic Theory and Policies: New Directions After Neoliberalism” pp. 1-38, Edited by Philip Arestis and Malcolm Sawyer, First published, Palgrave macmillan, 2011
Chang, H.J. ve Grabel, I. Reclaiming Development: An Alternative Economic Policy Manual. London: Zed Books, 2004
Davidson, P. (2004), “A Post Keynesian view of the Washington consensus and how to improve it” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27 (2): 207-230
Dünya Bankası Veri Dağıtım Sistemi, http://data.worldbank.org/
Harvey, J. T. (2003), “Exchange Rates”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Kregel, J. (2008), “The Discrete Charm of the Washington Concensus” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 30(4): 541-560
Krogstad, E. (2007), “The Post-Washington Consensus, Brand New Agenda or Old Wine in New Bottle”, Challenge, March-April, ss.67-85
Laramie ve Mair (2003), “Taxation”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Lavoie, M. Introduction to Post-Keynesian Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, First Published 2006
Marangos, J. (2012), “ The Post Keynesian retort to “After the Washington Consensus”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 34(4): 583-609
Marangos, J. (2008), “The Evolution of the Anti-Washington Consensus Debate: From ‘Post-Washington Consensus’ to ‘After the Washington Consensus’, Competition & Change, 12( 3) : 227–244
Marangos, J. (2009), “The Evolotion of the Term ‘Washington Consensus’”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(2): 350–384
Naim, M. (1999), “Fads and Fashion in Economic Reforms: Washington Consensus or Washington Confusion?” Foreign Policy Magazine, ss.1-22
Nevile, J.W. (2003), “Fiscal Policy”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Ocampo, J.A. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility” Natural Resources Forum, Editorial, 28 : 249–250
Öniş Z. ve F. Şenses (2005), “Rethinking the Emerging Post-Washington Consensus”, Development and Change, 36(2): 263–290
Rodrik D. (2006), “Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion? A Review of the World Bank’s Economic Growth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade of Reform”, Journal of Economic Literature, XLIV: .973–987
Rodrik, D. (2011), “The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy” World Trade Review, 10 (3): 409-421
Saad –Filho, A. (2007), “Life Beyond the Washington Consensus: An Introduction to Pro-Poor Macroeconomics Policies” Review of Political Economy, 19 (4): 513-537
Williamson, J. (1997), The Washington Consensus revisited. In L. Emmerij (ed.), Economic and Social Development in the XXI Century (pp.48-61). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank
Williamson, J. (2004-2005), “The Strange History of the Washington Consensus”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27( 2): 195-206
Year 2015,
Volume: 24 Issue: 2, 247 - 262, 31.10.2015
Yelda Tekgül
,
Mehmet Fatih Cin
References
- Akçay, Ü. ve Türkay, M (2009), “Neoliberalizmden Kalkınmacı Yaklaşıma: Devletin Sermaye Birikimi Sürecindeki Yeri Üzerine”, Sermaye Birikimi, Kalkınma, Azgelişmişlik, SAV Yayınları, İstanbul.
Arestis,P. (2004), Washington Consensus and Financial Liberalization , Journal of Post Keynesian Economics , 27(2): 251-271
Arestis, ve Sawyer, M. New Economics as Mainstream Economics, içinde, “Economic Theory and Policies: New Directions After Neoliberalism” pp. 1-38, Edited by Philip Arestis and Malcolm Sawyer, First published, Palgrave macmillan, 2011
Chang, H.J. ve Grabel, I. Reclaiming Development: An Alternative Economic Policy Manual. London: Zed Books, 2004
Davidson, P. (2004), “A Post Keynesian view of the Washington consensus and how to improve it” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27 (2): 207-230
Dünya Bankası Veri Dağıtım Sistemi, http://data.worldbank.org/
Harvey, J. T. (2003), “Exchange Rates”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Kregel, J. (2008), “The Discrete Charm of the Washington Concensus” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 30(4): 541-560
Krogstad, E. (2007), “The Post-Washington Consensus, Brand New Agenda or Old Wine in New Bottle”, Challenge, March-April, ss.67-85
Laramie ve Mair (2003), “Taxation”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Lavoie, M. Introduction to Post-Keynesian Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, First Published 2006
Marangos, J. (2012), “ The Post Keynesian retort to “After the Washington Consensus”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 34(4): 583-609
Marangos, J. (2008), “The Evolution of the Anti-Washington Consensus Debate: From ‘Post-Washington Consensus’ to ‘After the Washington Consensus’, Competition & Change, 12( 3) : 227–244
Marangos, J. (2009), “The Evolotion of the Term ‘Washington Consensus’”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(2): 350–384
Naim, M. (1999), “Fads and Fashion in Economic Reforms: Washington Consensus or Washington Confusion?” Foreign Policy Magazine, ss.1-22
Nevile, J.W. (2003), “Fiscal Policy”, The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics içinde, Edt. J.E. King,, Edward Elgar Cheltendam, UK.Northampton, MA, USA , 2003
Ocampo, J.A. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility” Natural Resources Forum, Editorial, 28 : 249–250
Öniş Z. ve F. Şenses (2005), “Rethinking the Emerging Post-Washington Consensus”, Development and Change, 36(2): 263–290
Rodrik D. (2006), “Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion? A Review of the World Bank’s Economic Growth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade of Reform”, Journal of Economic Literature, XLIV: .973–987
Rodrik, D. (2011), “The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy” World Trade Review, 10 (3): 409-421
Saad –Filho, A. (2007), “Life Beyond the Washington Consensus: An Introduction to Pro-Poor Macroeconomics Policies” Review of Political Economy, 19 (4): 513-537
Williamson, J. (1997), The Washington Consensus revisited. In L. Emmerij (ed.), Economic and Social Development in the XXI Century (pp.48-61). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank
Williamson, J. (2004-2005), “The Strange History of the Washington Consensus”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27( 2): 195-206