LEADER 03056nam  22005654a 450 
001 9910818335503321
005 20200520144314.0
010   $a1-139-93116-4
010   $a1-280-70220-6
010   $a0-511-75437-X
010   $a0-511-23093-1
010   $a0-511-23170-9
010   $a0-511-22933-X
010   $a0-511-31683-6
010   $a0-511-23017-6
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC275219
035   $a(CKB)1000000000353011
035   $a(UkCbUP)CR9780511754371
035   $a(EXLCZ)991000000000353011
100   $a20031230d2004      uy         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aState-directed development $epolitical power and industrialization in the global periphery /$fAtul Kohli
205   $a1st ed.
210   $aCambridge, UK ;$aNew York $cCambridge University Press$d2004
215   $a1 online resource (xii, 466 pages) $cdigital, PDF file(s)
300   $aTitle from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 05 Oct 2015).
311 0 $a0-521-54525-0 
311 0 $a0-521-83670-0 
320   $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 427-445) and index.
327   $aCover; Half-title; Title; Copyright; Dedication; Contents; List of Tables and Figures; Acknowledgments; Introduction; PART I GALLOPING AHEAD; PART II TWO STEPS FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK; PART III SLOW BUT STEADY; PART IV DASHED EXPECTATIONS; Conclusion; Select Bibliography; Index
330   $aWhy have some developing country states been more successful at facilitating industrialization than others? An answer to this question is developed by focusing both on patterns of state construction and intervention aimed at promoting industrialization. Four countries are analyzed in detail - South Korea, Brazil, India, and Nigeria - over the twentieth century. The states in these countries varied from cohesive-capitalist (mainly in Korea), through fragmented-multiclass (mainly in India), to neo-patrimonial (mainly in Nigeria). It is argued that cohesive-capitalist states have been most effective at promoting industrialization and neo-patrimonial states the least. The performance of fragmented-multiclass states falls somewhere in the middle. After explaining in detail as to why this should be so, the study traces the origins of these different state types historically, emphasizing the role of different types of colonialisms in the process of state construction in the developing world.
606   $aIndustrial policy$zDeveloping countries
606   $aIndustrialization$zDeveloping countries
607   $aDeveloping countries$xEconomic policy
607   $aDeveloping countries$xPolitics and government
615  0$aIndustrial policy
615  0$aIndustrialization
676   $a338.9/009172/4
700   $aKohli$b Atul$0288188
801  0$bMiAaPQ
801  1$bMiAaPQ
801  2$bMiAaPQ
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910818335503321
996   $aState-directed development$9749754
997   $aUNINA