INTL 532/ MGEC 632 ADVANCED TOPICS IN POLITICAL ECONOMY AND TURKEY KOÇ 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: [email protected]

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