RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    베이징 컨센서스 비판: 라모와 아리기의 논의를 중심으로 = A Critical Review of the ‘Beijing Consensus’: Focusing on Ramo’s and Arrighi’s Arguments

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A104832141

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Since 1978 China’s economic miracle has produced various developmental issues, and it was recently conceptualized as the ‘Beijing Consensus’ which would replace the Washington Consensus and suggest an alternative development option for the developing countries. However, it is argued that the discourse on the Beijing Consensus might misinterpret and distort the realities of China’s development experiences, and also misguide false alternative model to the Third world. This study attempts to review critically the discourse on the Beijing Consensus focusing on Ramo(2004)’s and Arrighi(2007)’s arguments, and to re-identify the natures and features of China’s development model.
    Ramo’s thesis has definitely so many limitations to explain the China’s experience, due to inadequate conceptualization of core factors enabling the Chinese miracle and to ad hoc interpretations disguising itself as scientific axioms just like quantum physics. And, Arrighi has argued that China’s renaissance in the reform era was associated with its historical traditions such as industrious revolution and Smithian natural path of development. However, Arrighi’s argument also did not make sense, because of false recognition on market-economy and capitalism, ‘orientalism in reverse’ toward China’s renaissance, and ad hoc explanations on transitions of world hegemony.
    Alternatively, this study identify China’s development model as mixed capitalism including coexistence of neoliberal market and developmental-keynesian interventionism. Also, we can find out that the chinese model have exceptional characteristics rather than universal properties, and have problems of its sustainability concerning about unbalance of accumulation.
    번역하기

    Since 1978 China’s economic miracle has produced various developmental issues, and it was recently conceptualized as the ‘Beijing Consensus’ which would replace the Washington Consensus and suggest an alternative development option for the devel...

    Since 1978 China’s economic miracle has produced various developmental issues, and it was recently conceptualized as the ‘Beijing Consensus’ which would replace the Washington Consensus and suggest an alternative development option for the developing countries. However, it is argued that the discourse on the Beijing Consensus might misinterpret and distort the realities of China’s development experiences, and also misguide false alternative model to the Third world. This study attempts to review critically the discourse on the Beijing Consensus focusing on Ramo(2004)’s and Arrighi(2007)’s arguments, and to re-identify the natures and features of China’s development model.
    Ramo’s thesis has definitely so many limitations to explain the China’s experience, due to inadequate conceptualization of core factors enabling the Chinese miracle and to ad hoc interpretations disguising itself as scientific axioms just like quantum physics. And, Arrighi has argued that China’s renaissance in the reform era was associated with its historical traditions such as industrious revolution and Smithian natural path of development. However, Arrighi’s argument also did not make sense, because of false recognition on market-economy and capitalism, ‘orientalism in reverse’ toward China’s renaissance, and ad hoc explanations on transitions of world hegemony.
    Alternatively, this study identify China’s development model as mixed capitalism including coexistence of neoliberal market and developmental-keynesian interventionism. Also, we can find out that the chinese model have exceptional characteristics rather than universal properties, and have problems of its sustainability concerning about unbalance of accumulation.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 리민치, "중국의 부상과 자본주의 세계경제의 종말" 돌베개 2009

    2 이정훈, "중국의 미래, 중국이라는 미래-최근 출간된 중국 관련 단행본의 검토를 중심으로" 역사문제연구소 97 (97): 292-317, 2011

    3 천즈우, "중국식 모델은 없다" 메디치 2009

    4 김도희, "중국모델론-개혁과 발전의 비교역사적 탐구-" 부키 2008

    5 윤상우, "중국,대만의 경제통합과 대만 성장모델" 비판사회학회 66 (66): 229-255, 2005

    6 소, 앨빈 Y., "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    7 훙호펑, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    8 아리기, 조반니, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    9 훙호펑, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    10 노턴, 배리, "중국 경제-시장으로의 이행과 성장-" 서울경제경영 2007

    1 리민치, "중국의 부상과 자본주의 세계경제의 종말" 돌베개 2009

    2 이정훈, "중국의 미래, 중국이라는 미래-최근 출간된 중국 관련 단행본의 검토를 중심으로" 역사문제연구소 97 (97): 292-317, 2011

    3 천즈우, "중국식 모델은 없다" 메디치 2009

    4 김도희, "중국모델론-개혁과 발전의 비교역사적 탐구-" 부키 2008

    5 윤상우, "중국,대만의 경제통합과 대만 성장모델" 비판사회학회 66 (66): 229-255, 2005

    6 소, 앨빈 Y., "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    7 훙호펑, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    8 아리기, 조반니, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    9 훙호펑, "중국, 자본주의를 바꾸다" 미지북스 2009

    10 노턴, 배리, "중국 경제-시장으로의 이행과 성장-" 서울경제경영 2007

    11 사토 요시유키, "신자유주의와 권력-자기-경영적 주체의 탄생과 소수자-되기-" 후마니타스 2014

    12 하비, 데이빗, "신자유주의-간략한 역사-" 한울아카데미 2007

    13 아리기, 조반니, "베이징의 애덤 스미스-21세기의 계보-" 도서출판 길 2007

    14 조슈아 쿠퍼 레이모, "베이징 컨센서스" 아세아문제연구소 52 (52): 14-77, 2009

    15 딜릭, 아리프, "발견으로서의 동아시아" 문학과지성사 2000

    16 박상현, "동아시아와 세계체계 연구: 쟁점과 전망" 한국사회사학회 92 (92): 93-128, 2011

    17 박승우, "동아시아 공동체와 한국의 미래-동북아를 넘어 동아시아로-" 이매진 2008

    18 백승욱, "노동과 발전의 사회학" 한울 2003

    19 Denemark, Robert A., "World System History : Arrighi, Frank, and the Way Forward" 15 (15): 233-242, 2009

    20 Chu, Yun-han, "The Politics of the Asian Economic Crisis" Cornell University Press 1999

    21 Bair, Jennifer, "The New Hegemon? Contingency and Agency in the Asian Age" 15 (15): 220-227, 2009

    22 Kennedy, Scott, "The Myth of the Beijing Consensus" 19 (19): 461-477, 2010

    23 Polanyi, Karl, "The Great Transformation" Beacon Press 1957

    24 Yao, Yang, "The End of the Beijing Consensus : Can China’s Model of Authoritarian Growth Survive?" 2010

    25 Xia, Ming, "The Dual Developmental State : Development Strategy and Institutional Arrangements for China’s Transition" Ashgate 2000

    26 Zhao, Suisheng, "The China Model : Can It Replace the Western Model of Modernization?" 19 (19): 419-436, 2010

    27 Li, Xin, "Redefining Beijing Consensus : Ten Economic Principles" 2 (2): 297-311, 2009

    28 Frank, Andre Gunder, "ReOrient" The University of California Press 1998

    29 Said, Edward, "Orientalism" Vintage Books 1978

    30 Coyne, Gary, "Natural and Unnatural Paths" 15 (15): 228-232, 2009

    31 Foucault, Michel, "Naissance de la Biopolitique" Seuil 2004

    32 McMillan, John, "How to Reform a Planned Economy : Lessons from China" 8 (8): 130-143, 1993

    33 Gulick, John, "Giovanni Arrighi’s Tapestry of East and West" 15 (15): 243-248, 2009

    34 Panitch, Leo, "Giovanni Arrighi in Beijing : An Alternative to Capitalism?" 18 : 74-87, 2010

    35 Trichur, Ganesh, "Giovanni Arrighi in Beijing" 15 (15): 256-263, 2009

    36 Sachs, Jeffery, "From Reform to Growth: China and Other Countries in Transition" OECD 1994

    37 Huang, Yasheng, "Debating China’s Economic Growth : The Beijing Consensus or the Washington Consensus" 31-47, 2010

    38 Naughton, Barry, "China’s Distinctive System : Can It Be a Model for Others?" 19 (19): 430-460, 2010

    39 So, Alvin Y, "China’s Developmental Miracle: Origins. Transformations. and Challenges" M. E. Sharpe 2003

    40 OECD, "China : Progress and Reform Challenges" OECD 2003

    41 Dirlik, Arif, "Beijing Consensus: Beijing ‘Gongshi’Who Recognizes Whom and to What End?" Globalization and Autonomy Online Compendium 2006

    42 Pradella, Lucia, "Beijing Between Smith and Marx" 18 : 88-109, 2010

    43 Christiansen, Flemming, "Arrighi’s Adam Smith in Beijing : Engaging China" 18 : 110-129, 2010

    44 Arrighi, Giovanni., "Adam Smith in Beijing : Lineages of the Twenty-first Century" Verso 2007

    45 윤상우, "'발전국가'를 준거로 한 중국 성장체제의 평가" 한국사회학회 39 (39): 135-162, 2005

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2022 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2019-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2016-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2012-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2009-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.55 0.55 0.47
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.47 0.46 0.727 0.13
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼