INTL 532/ MGEC 632 ADVANCED TOPICS IN POLITICAL
ECONOMY AND TURKEY
KOC UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Spring 2005
INSTRUCTOR: Professor Ziya Öniş
OFFICE: CASE 150
OFFICE HOURS: Monday 14:00-16:00
E-mail: zonis@ku.edu.tr
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The course aims to provide an in-depth coverage of selected set issues in the field of
international and comparative political economy. Topics to be covered this year
include the global trade and investment regime: from GATT to WTO and beyond;
new regionalism in comparative perspective; the European model of political
economy and its future; NAFTA, Asia Pacific and Mercosour: evolution and future
prospects; the global financial system, emerging market crises and the reform of the
IMF; the emerging Post-Washington Consensus and the future of north-south
relations; issues in the political economy of Turkey
ASSESSMENT
Term Paper Project ( 40%)
Class Participation ( 20%)
Two Critical Review Papers (20 %)
Group Project and presentation ( 20%)
BACKGROUND TEXT:
Robert Gilpin. 2000. The Challenge of Global Capitalism. World
Economy in the 21st. Century. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
1
The International Trade and Investment Regime: GATT and WTO
Gilpin, Chs 3, 6
Krasner, S. D., ed. 1982. Intrnational Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wade, R.H.. 2003. “ What Strategies are Viable for Developing Countries Today?
The World Trade Organization and the Shrinking of the ‘ Development Space’”.
Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 10, No.4.
Kingston. W. 2002 “ Removing Some Harm from the World Trade Organization”.
Oxford Development Studies, Vol. 32, No.2.
Wolfe. R. 2004. “ Crossing the River by Feeling the Stones: Where the WTO is
Going after Seattle, Doha and Cancun”. Review of International Political Economy,
Vol. 11, No.3.
New Regionalism in Comparative Perspective. NAFTA, the EU and
the Asia-Pacific
Gilpin Chs 7-9
Gamble. A. And A. Payne, eds. 1996. Regionalism and World Order. London.
Macmillan.
Gruegel, J. And W. Hout.eds. 1999. Regionalism across the North-South Divide:
State Strategies and Globalization. London. Routledge.
Wallace, H. 2000. “ Europeanization and Globalization: Complementary or
Contradictory Trends?”, New Political Economy, Vol. 5.
Giddens, A., eds, 2001. The Global Third Way Debate. Cambridge: Polity Press (. Ch.
7, 8, ).
Gruegel, J. 2004. “ New Regionalism and Modes of Governance-Comparing US and
EU Strategies in Latin America”. European Journal of International Relations, Vol.
10, No.4.
Bowles, P. 2002. “ Asia’s Post-Crisis Regionalism: Bringing the State Back in,
Keeping the ( United) States Out”. Review of International Political Economy,Vol. 9,
No.2.
Weiss.L. 2004. “ Developmental States Before and After the Asian Crisis” in J.
Perraton and Ben Clift, eds.,Where are National Capitalisms Now? New York:
Palgrave.
2
Post-War International Monetary System and the IMF; Recent
Debates on IMF Reform in the Age of Financial Globalization
Gilpin Chs 4-5
Stiglitz, J. 2003. “ Capital Market Liberalization, Economic Growth and Instability”.
World Development. Vol. 38, No.8.
Stiglitz, J. 2003. “ Globalization and Growth in Emerging Markets and the New
Economy”. Journal of Policy Modelling. Vol. 25.
Bird, G. 2001. “ A Suitable Case for Treatment? Understanding the Ongoing Debate
about the IMF”. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22, No.5.
International Monetary Fund. 2003. “ Lessons from the Crisis in Argentina”. Report
Prepared by the Policy Development and Review Department, mimeo. Washington
DC. The International Monetary Fund.
Tedesco, L. 2002. “ Argentina’s Turmoil: The Politics of Informality and the Roots of
the Economic Meltdown”. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 15, No. 3.
Jomo. K. S. , eds. 2004. After the Storm. Crisis, Recovery and Sustaining
Development in Four Asian Economies. Singapore: Singapore University Press ( esp.
Chs 1,2, 7, 9)
The Development Debate: The Emerging Post-Washington
Consensus in Critical Perspective
Gilpin 10-11
Held. D. 2003. Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to Washington
Consensus. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A., eds, 2001. The Global Third Way Debate. (chs. 24, 26, 27, 28).
Chang, Ha-Joon. 2003. Globalisation, Economic Development and the Role of the
State. London: Zed Books
Rodrik, D. 2003. “ Growth Strategies”, Harvard University mimeo
Download: http://kgshome.harvard.edu/~.drodrik.academic.ksg/growthstrat10.pdf
Rodrik.D. 2002. “ After Neo-liberalism, What?”, Harvard University mimeo
Download:
http://kgshome.harvard.edu/~drodrik.academic.ksg/After%20Neoliberalism.pdf.
Dani Rodrik.2001. “ The Global Governance of Trade as if Development Really
Mattered”, Harvard University, mimeo
Download: http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~.drodrik.academic.ksg/UNDPtrade.pdf
3
O’Hearn. 2000. “ Globalization, ‘New Tigers’ and the End of the Developmental
State? The Case of the Celtic Tiger”. Politics and Society, Vol. 28, No.1.
Turkish Neo-liberalism in Critical Perspective: Recent Financial
Crises and Post-Crisis Dynamics in Turkey
Öniş, Z. 2004. “ Turgut Özal and his Economic Legacy: Turkish NeoLiberalism in
Critical Perspective”. Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 40, No.4
Öniş, Z. and B. Rubin, eds., 2004. The Turkish Economy in Crisis. London:
Routledge
Öniş, Z. and E.Alper. 2004. “ The Turkish Banking System,Financial Crises and the
IMF in the Age of Capital Account Liberalization: A Political Economy
Perspective”. New Perspectives on Turkey, 30.
Akçay, C. 2003. “The Turkish Banking Sector Two Years After the Crisis: A
Snapshot of the Sector and Current Risks”. In Öniş and Rubin (2003)
Akyüz, Y and K. Boratav. 2003. ”The Making of the Turkish Financial Crises”.
World Development, Vol. 31, No.9.
Öniş, Z. and E.Alper. 2003. “Emerging Market Crises and the IMF: Rethinking the
Role of the IMF in the Light of Turkey’s 2000 and 2001 Crises ”.Canadian Journal of
Development Studies, Vol.24, No.2.
Öniş, Z. 2004. “Argentina, IMF and the Limits of Neo-Liberal Globalization: A
Comparative Perspective”.The Review of International Affairs, Vol. 3, No.3.
Buğra. A. and Ç. Keyder. 2003. New Poverty and the Changing Welfare Regime of
Turkey. Report prepared for the UNDP
Political Economy of Turkey-EU Relations in Comparative
Perspective
Uğur, M.. 2004. “ Economic Mismanagement and Turkey’s Troubled Relations with
the EU: Is there a Link?” in M. Uğur and N. Canefe, eds., Turkey and European
Integration. Accession Prospects and Issues. London: Routledge.
Eder, M. 2004. “ Populism as a Barrier to Entry to integration with the EU:
Rethinking theCopenhagen Criteria.”. In M. Uğur and N. Canefe, eds..
Dutz, M., M. Us and K. Yılmaz. 2003. “Turkey’s Foreign Direct Investment
Challenges: Competition, the Rule of Law and the EU Accession”. Mimeographed,
The World Bank and Department of Economics, Koç University.
4
Derviş, K. et al. 2004. “Relative Income Growth and Convergence”. Centre for
European Policy Studies, Brussels EU-Turkey Working Papers, No. 8, September.
Derviş, K. et. al. 2004. “Turkey and the EU Budget: Prospects and Issues”. Centre for
European Policy Studies Working Papers, No. 6, August
ACADEMIC HONESTY
Honesty and trust are important to us all as individuals. Students and faculty adhere to
the following principles of academic honesty at Koc University
1.
Individual accountability for all individual work , written or oral. Copying
from others or providing answers or information, written or oral, to others is
cheating.
2.
Providing proper acknowledgment of the original author. Copying from
another student’s paper or from another text without acknowledgment is
plagiarism.
3.
Study or project group activity is effective and authorized teamwork.
Unauthorized help from another person or having someone else to write one’s
paper or assignment is collusion.
Cheating, plagiarism and collusion are serious offences resulting in an F grade and
disciplinary action
5