Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article reconceptualizes neoliberalism as a legal and institutional order rather than a retreat of the state. It traces the intellectual foundations of market-oriented legality and shows how property, contract, competition, privatization, independent regulation, monetary institutions, fiscal rules, and international commitments were used to stabilize expectations and constrain discretion. Its central claim is that the developmental effects of this order depended not on formal rules alone but on four institutional conditions, credibility, capacity, contestability, and complementarity. This four-C framework explains why similar reforms promoted stability and investment in some settings while producing concentration, fragility, inequality, or political backlash in others. The article then applies the framework to renewed industrial policy, geoeconomic rivalry, climate governance, and digital markets. It concludes that the central task for law and development is neither to restore nor reject neoliberalism, but to build legal regimes that combine credible commitments with capable administration, meaningful review, institutional fit, and democratic adaptability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rok Spruk (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: