This dissertation analyzes the conditions that explain the dynamism of socio-territorial systems of firms and examines how these systems can foster local industrialization and reduce urban poverty in Peru. The theoretical argument builds upon the concepts of external economies, industrial districts and the social embeddedness of economic action, providing an alternative interpretation of the informal sector. It draws on field research and case studies conducted in Peru between August 1991 and August 1992. The findings support the view that the dynamism of small-scale manufacturing results from the development of collective entrepreneurial capabilities and new forms of cooperation and competition. Cooperation takes various forms such as subcontracting, joint marketing, and the sharing of inputs, tools and information. When firms compete on product design and the search for new markets rather than by lowering wages, there is scope for self-sustained expansion. In the first case study (El Porvenir, Trujillo) inter-firm cooperation was based upon ethnic homogeneity, kinship bonds and social norms of equity and reciprocity. Learning experiences within two larger shoe factories stimulated the organization of spin-off firms and networks of complementary specialized producers. These networks subsequently outcompeted the larger factories, expanded their share of the national market and are now exporting part of their output to neighboring countries. In the second case (Villa El Salvador, Lima) the state, foreign donor agencies and producers' associations played a more prominent role. The construction of an industrial park and service centers was sought to generate scale economies in the provision of productive services and entrepreneurial functions that were beyond the reach of individual producers. The main challenges were associated with the definition of property rights and the generation of stable institutional structures to operate these centers as self-sustained organizations. The study suggests that specialized support should be directed to those clusters of firms with higher growth potential and stronger linkages with the local economy. The constitution of quasi-public organizations can strengthen local leadership and nurture the formation of political entrepreneurs. The dissertation underscores the dynamism of socially embedded enterprises and institutions as the foundation for democracy and development.

This case study, set in the south central highlands of West Timor, Indonesia, presents a range of strategies used by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and local farmers to resist the mining of two marble peaks. The narrative, set within the context of political developments in Indonesia in recent years, is presented through several genres to enhance an ethnographic exploration of learning in a context of resistance. Some of the issues explored in the telling of the tale include gender and resistance, and the juxtaposition of NGO and farmer strategies of resistance as shaped by their different relationships to social and political institutions of the nation-state. The study, however, is not limited only to a discussion of strategies, the “what and how” of resistance—resistance as curriculum—but also looks at resistance as a learning regime, the heuristic occasion for the articulation of identity in which those on the underside of power assert human identity over an identity as victims. The analysis of resistance as learning regime draws on a local hermeneutical framework that situates recognition as a response to the epistemological violation inherent in the mining, rehearsal as response to cultural violation, and reciprocity as a response to economic violation. This privileging of recognition, rehearsal, and reciprocity is the perspective from which I argue that subsistence agriculture is a way of life that integrates rather than separates cultural, ecological, economic, and epistemological aspects of identity. As such, it is a viable alternative to projects of unsustainable economic development, such as mining marble, that tear apart ecological systems and the ways of life embedded in those systems in order to control them.

No description available.

How much of the Arab Common Market provisions are actually implemented? And which member country benefits relatively more than the others from the Common Market arrangement? These are the two major questions that this research attempts to provide answers for. At present, the Arab Common Market is comprised of six member countries: Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Mauritania, and Democratic Yemen. Egypt was also a member until 1979 when its membership was suspended because of the Camp David Agreements. The first three are considered to be more advanced and were among the first to ratify the Common Market resolution as soon as it was passed in 1965. Accordingly, they are supposed to form a free trade area and are also supposed to be working on establishing a common external tariff against the outside world. Libya joined the Common Market in 1977. Mauritania and Democratic Yemen joined in 1980 and 1981 respectively. However, both were considered to be less advanced and were allowed to exclude a list of products from trade liberalization either to protect domestic industry or for revenue purposes. Goods not included in their exceptions lists were to be liberalized in a gradual process that will extend until 1988 for Mauritania and 1990 for Democratic Yemen. Currently, a free trade area is in operation for Jordan, Syria, and Iraq, at least as far as the removal of tariffs is concerned. However, some other non-tariff barriers are still practiced, such as licensing and foreign exchange allocations. Libya still excludes a number of items from trade liberalization with the objective of protecting domestic industry. Mauritania and Democratic Yemen joined the Common Market in 1980 and 1981; because they are considered to be less advanced, they still have until 1988 and 1990 respectively to implement the trade liberalization program. At present, both Iraq and Syria practice state trading and foreign trade planning. State trading could have a significant, positive or negative, impact on directing trade towards partner countries. It definitely weakens the causal relationship between market forces and trade flows, and subjects trade more to political factors. Because of the extensive use of state trading by Iraq and Syria, trade among member countries of the Arab Common Market fluctuates considerably, dropping when political relationships are tense to negligible amounts and increasing when friendly relationships dominate to an amount not justifiable by market forces alone. This was achieved without resorting to any of the traditional commercial policy tools. The second question regarding who benefits relatively more from the Arab Common Market was answered by looking at trade creation and trade diversion for each country and by looking at the volume of exports of each country to the other Common Market members and the degree of protection that those exports enjoy in their respective markets. Jordan experienced a high degree of trade creation; it has the largest volume of exports, and its exports enjoy the highest degree of protection in the Syrian and Iraqi markets. Based on these criteria, Jordan is assumed to benefit more from the Common Market arrangement. The research also identified other areas of research. Such areas include ex ante measurements of benefits for countries which are still reluctant to join the Common Market and an analysis of the impact of joint projects on the economies of the countries in which they are located and on other members. This is supposed to lead to a formula for allocating industries among member countries. One conclusion of this research is that a pure rational approach will be insufficient for analyzing the impacts of economic integration, and that a multiple perspectives approach is a must for such an analysis.

This study analyzed the history of American foreign trade policy during the administrations of Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. Four levels of analysis (international, governmental, societal, and individual) provided a framework to explore two historiograhical problems: the decision-making power structure of U.S. trade policy formulation and the aims, motives, and results of this policy. The campaign for the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 served as a basis for testing four models of decision-making: bureaucratic, corporatist, interest group, and inter-branch. The models were tested in the specific issue areas of textiles, lumber, oil, and carpets and glass. These commodities also were used to validate the interpretations of the "hegemony" or the "comparative-advantage" schools of thought regarding the aims and effects of American trade policy. Under the auspices of the Kennedy Round negotiations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, trade relations with the European Economic Community were the overall focus of the debate between the two schools, but bilateral trade with Japan, Asian less-developed countries, Canada, and Venezuela assumed primary importance depending on the commodity. The inter-branch model, and to a lesser extent pressure from interest groups, was found to determine decision-making on trade matters. The assumptions of the comparative-advantage school generally were most accurate in describing the motives and results of U.S. trade policy.

No description available.

Thesis--Carnegie Institute of Technology. / Bibliography: p. 155-161.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.