Developmental State or Economic Statecraft? Where, Why and How the Difference Matters

A peculiar set of discontinuities and contradictions has recently emerged in the institutions-oriented literature that spans comparative capitalism, developmental states, and strategic techno-industrial governance. Around the globe, developmental states are reported to be both disappearing (chiefly in East Asia) an proliferating (not least in the United States). These depictions, we argue, are indicative of how the developmental state concept has become unmoored from its theoretical and historical grounding, and inadvertently politicised in scholarly debate. The concept has thus become unproductive (even if still of heuristic value). In this paper we offer a fresh way of thinking about the state’s activism in both Korea and the United States. Specifically, we refurbish the idea of statecraft as it plays out in two very different national agendas, and as it is shaped by contrasting state-society relations. By paying attention to the differential international drivers and state ambitions, our analysis delivers a new and improved understanding of the character, purpose and capacities of the state in each national setting and, by implication, of their commitment and ability to confront specific challenges.