One could think of neoliberalism as an ideological platform, which can then be described without regard to how faithfully it is implemented into laws and policies, or one could describe neoliberalism as concrete laws and policies, no matter how far removed those might be from their theoretical inspirations. If it is the latter we are interested in, then neoliberalism stands for laws that attempt to bring about economic growth by minimizing state intervention in the market and otherwise ease capital's profitability and investment. Such policies include—deregulation of business practices, including laws concerned with environmental and labor issues; privatization of state enterprises; tax cuts; budget cuts, leading to reduction in welfare and other social provisions; monetarism; elimination of protectionist policies; and liberalization of financial and foreign exchange markets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Neoliberal policies share some policies in common, but usually go beyond, what has been referred to as the “Washington Consensus,” that is, those policies that various institutions in Washington DC—including the U.S. Treasury, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank—agreed were desirable (Williamson 1990, 2003).
- 2.
The review below does not attempt to offer an exhaustive consideration of the scholarship on the rise of neoliberalism, but instead to offer a sample of representative studies on that topic. As it is often the case, there are alternative ways to analytically differentiate the competing views.
- 3.
- 4.
The current literature on the rise of neoliberalism assigns active role to policy-makers, transnational capital, and intellectuals. However, other national and international actors, including lobbyists, international organizations officials, NGOs, and businesses, have played an equally important role.
- 5.
Some see intellectual property rights as a prominent element in neoliberalism. Others, however, argue that IPR violate neoclassical economic principles and that IPR laws are an example for the inconsistency, and interested nature, of the neoliberal project.
- 6.
- 7.
The escape clause allows the imposition of higher duties if the industry in question demonstrated to a quasi-judicial panel that it had suffered injury due to imports. The antidumping law allows the imposition of punitive duties if the industry demonstrated that the imports had been illegally dumped, that is, sold in prices lower than the prices they are sold at home. The countervailing duty law allows imposition of duties if the industry demonstrated that the imports had benefited from illegal subsidies.
References
Abbott, F. M. (2004). The Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health and the contradictory trend in bilateral and regional free trade agreements. Occasional Paper 14. Quaker United Nations Office.
Aginam, O. (2002). Public health and international law: From the core to the peripheries: Multilateral governance of malaria in a multi-cultural world. Chicago Journal of International Law, 3, 87.
Babb, S. (2001). Managing Mexico: Economists from nationalism to neoliberalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Birmingham, K. (2000). Another attempt at creating a global vaccine initiative. Nature Medicine, 6, 238.
Bond, P. (1999). Globalization, pharmaceutical pricing, and South African health policy: Managing confrontation with U.S. firms and politicians. International Journal of Health Services, 765–792.
Busch, M., & Reinhard, E. (2002). Testing international trade law: Empirical studies of GATT/WTO dispute settlement. In D. M. Kennedy and J. D. Southwick (Eds.), The political economy of international trade law: Essays in honor of Robert Hudec. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Callinicos, A. (2001). Against the Third Way. Cambridge: Polity.
Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional Change and Globalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chorev, N. (2005a). The institutional project of neo-liberal globalism: The case of the WTO. Theory and Society, 34, 317–355.
Chorev, N. (2005b). Making and remaking state institutional arrangements: The case of U.S. trade policy in the 1970s. Journal of Historical Sociology., 18, 3–36.
Chorev, N. (2007a) A fluid divide: Domestic and international factors in U.S. trade policy formation. Review of International Political Economy, 14, 653–689.
Chorev, N. (2007b) Remaking U.S. trade policy: From protectionism to globalization. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Clark, I. (1998). Beyond the great divide: Globalization and the theory of international relations. Review of International Studies, 24, 479–498.
Cox, R. W. (1987). Production, power, and world order: Social forces in the making of history. New York: Columbia University Press.
Cox, R. W. (1996). Approaches to world order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dezalay, Y., & Garth, B. (2002). The internationalization of palace wars. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dieter, P., Walpen, B., & Neuhöffer, G., (Eds.), (2006). Neoliberal hegemony: A global critique. London and New York: Routledge.
Evans, P. (1995). Embedded autonomy: States and industrial transformation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Evans, P., Rueschemeyer, D., & Skocpol, T. (Eds.). (1985). Bringing the state back in. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fourcade-Gourinchas, M., & Babb, S. (2002). The rebirth of the liberal creed: Paths to neoliberalism in four countries. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 533–579.
Gellman, B. (2000a). “An unequal calculus of life and death.” Washington Post, 12/27/2000, p. A.01.
Gellman, B. (2000b). “A turning point that left millions behind.” Washington Post, 12/28/2000, p. A.1.
Gigot, P. A. (1994). “Potomac watch.” Wall Street Journal, 4/29/1994, p. A14.
Gill, S., & Law, D. (1993). Global hegemony and the structural power of capital. In S. Gill (Ed.), Gramsci, historical materialism and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldstein, J., Kahler, M., Keohane, R., & Slaughter, A-M. (2000). Introduction: Legalization and world politics. International Organization, 54, 385–399.
Guillén, M. F. (2001). The limits of convergence: Globalization and organizational change in Argentina, South Korea, and Spain. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Haggard, S. (1988). The institutional foundations of hegemony: Explaining the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934. International Organization, 42, 91–119.
Hall, P. A. & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44, 936–957
Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Henisz, W., Zelner, B. A., & Guillén, M. F. (2005). The worldwide diffusion of market-oriented infrastructure reform, 1977–1999. American Sociological Review, 70, 871–897.
Heywood, M. (2001). Debunking ‘Conglomo-talk’: A case study of Amicus Curiae. Law, Democracy and Development 5.
Jawara, F., & Kwa, A. (2003). Behind the scenes at the WTO. London: Zed.
Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D. (2005) The diffusion of regulatory capitalism in Latin America: Sectoral and national channels in the making of a new order. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598, 102–124.
Krippner, Greta. Forthcoming. Capitalizing on Crisis: Political Origins of the Rise of Finance. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Martin, I. (2008). The permanent tax revolt: How the property tax transformed American politics. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
McMichael, P. (1996). Globalization: Myths and realities. Rural Sociology, 61, 25–55.
McNeil, D. G., Jr. (2008). “W.H.O. official complains of Gates Foundation dominance in malaria research.” New York Times, 2/16/2008, p. A.6.
Meseguer, C. (2005). Policy learning, policy diffusion, and the making of a new order. ANNALS, AAPSS, 598, 67–82.
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 144–181.
O'Riain, S. (2000). The flexible developmental state: Globalization, information technology and the ‘Celtic Tiger’. Politics & Society, 28, 157–193.
Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation state. New York: Free Press.
Pastor, R. A. (1980). Congress and the politics of U.S. foreign economic policy, 1929–1976. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Pierson, P. (1994). Dismantling the welfare state? Reagan, Thatcher, and the politics of retrenchment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pierson, P. & Skocpol, T. (2002). Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science. In I. Katznelson and H. V. Milner (Eds.) Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York: W. W. Norton.
Prasad, M. (2006). The politics of free markets: The rise of neoliberal economic policies in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Putnam, R. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. Internaitonal Organization, 42, 427–460.
Raghavan, C. (2000). The World Trade Organization and its dispute settlement system: Tilting the balance against the South. Malaysia: Third World Network.
Sassen, S. (1996). Losing control? Sovereignty in an age of globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights: From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Schnietz, K. E. (2000). The institutional foundation of U.S. trade policy: Revisiting explanations for the 1934 Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. Journal of Policy History, 12, 417–444.
Schwartländer, B., Grubb, I., & Perriëns, J. (2006). The 10-year struggle to provide antiretroviral treatment to people with HIV in the developing world. Lancet, 368, 541–546.
Sell, S. K. (2003). Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sell, S. K., & Prakash, A. (2004). Using ideas strategically: The contest between business and NGO networks in intellectual property rights. International Studies Quarterly, 48, 143–175.
Silva, E. (1993). Capitalist coalitions, the state, and neoliberal economic restructuring, Chile, 1973–88. World Politics, 45, 526–559.
Silva, P. (1996). Review: Pinochet's Economists: The Chicago School in Chile by Juan Gabriel Valdes. Journal of Latin American Studies, 28, 519–520.
Simmons, B. A., & Elkins, Z. (2004). The globalization of liberalization: Policy diffusion in the international political economy. American Political Science Review, 98, 171–189.
Simmons, B., Dobbin, F., & Garrett, G. (2006). The diffusion of liberalism. International Organization, 60, 781–810.
Slaughter, A-M. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Smith, J. (2004). Inequality in international trade? Developing countries and institutional change in WTO dispute settlement. Review of International Political Economy, 11, 542–573.
Somers, M. & Block, F. (2005). From poverty to perversity: Ideas, markets, and institutions over 200 years of welfare debate. American Sociological Review, 70, 260–287.
Steinberg, R. H. (2002). In the shadow of law or power? Consensus-based bargaining and outcomes in the GATT/ WTO. International Organization, 56, 339–374.
Steinmo, S., Thelen, K. & Longstreth, F. (Eds.). (1992). Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strange, S. (1996). The retreat of the state: The diffusion of power in the world economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Streeck, W. & Thelen, K. (Eds). (2005). Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swank, D. (2002). Global capital, political institutions, and policy change in developed welfare states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thelen, K. (2004). How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valdés, J. G. (1995). Pinochet's economists: The Chicago School in Chile. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waldholz, M. (2000). “Group pledges $150 million in bid to boost children's vaccinations.” Wall Street Journal, 9/21/2000, p. B.2.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system I: Capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. New York: Academic Press.
Weiss, L. (1998). The myth of the powerless state. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wilkinson, R. (2000). Multilateralism and the World Trade Organization: The architecture and extension of international trade regulation. London: Routledge.
Williamson, J. (1990). What Washington means by policy reform. In J. Williamson (Ed.) Latin American Adjustment: How Much Has Happened? Washington: Institute for International Economics.
Williamson, J. (2003). From reform agenda to damaged brand name: A short history of the Washington Consensus and suggestions for what to do next. Finance and Development, 10–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chorev, N. (2010). On the Origins of Neoliberalism: Political Shifts and Analytical Challenges. In: Leicht, K.T., Jenkins, J.C. (eds) Handbook of Politics. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68930-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68930-2_7
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-68929-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-68930-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)