A periodization of Latin American development in the Robinsonian tradition
This paper analyzes Joan Robinson's growth model and then adapts it in order to provide an explanatory taxonomy of Growth Eras. The Growth Eras or Ages were for Robinson a way to provide logical connections between output growth, capital accumulation, the degree of thriftiness, the real wage an...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Texto |
| Lenguaje: | English |
| Publicado: |
CEPAL
2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/11362/37358 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | This paper analyzes Joan Robinson's growth model and then adapts it in order to provide an explanatory taxonomy of Growth Eras. The Growth Eras or Ages were for Robinson a way to provide logical connections between output growth, capital accumulation, the degree of thriftiness, the real wage and illustrate a catalogue of growth possibilities. This modified taxonomy follows the spirit of Robinson's work, but it takes different theoretical approaches. which imply that some of the classifications do not fit perfectly the ones here suggested.
Latin America has moved from a Golden Age in the 1950s and 1960s to a Leaden Age in the 1980s, having two traverse periods, one of which the process of growth and industrialization accelerated in the late 1960s and early 1970s, which is referred to as a Galloping Platinum Age, an one in which a process of deindustrialization and reprimarization and maquilization of the productive structure took place, starting in the 1990s, which could be referred as the Creeping Platinum Age. |
|---|