Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The process of neoliberal globalisation has been associated with successive financial crises in the context of the 1990s, raising serious doubts concerning the sustainability of rapid growth in an environment of uncontrolled movements of short-term capital. The article probes into the origins of the financial crises in the semi-periphery through a structured comparison of three key recent crises in the world economy, namely the Mexican and Turkish crises of 1994 and the Asian crises of 1997. Whilst the magnitude of the capital flows and the dimensions of the subsequent crises are strikingly different, there are nonetheless important elements common to all three cases studied. One such common element involves the overdependence of the countries concerned on the short-term financial flows, in a setting characterised by premature capital account liberalisation in the absence of adequate regulation. It is striking that, contrary to the conventional IMF wisdom, financial crises have occurred in spite of 'sound fundamental', namely fiscal equilibrium and low inflation. The recent financial crises highlights a paradoxical situation: the need for effective regulation at a time when the capacity of the nation state to undertake the type of regulation needed severely circumscribed. Hence, the establishment of an effective regulatory framework at the global level emerges as a major requirement if successive financial crises, with significant economic and social cost, are to be avoided in the future.
Önіş et al. (Tue,) studied this question.