‘Catch-up’ Capabilities Compared

Peter Nolan
Additional contact information
Peter Nolan: Jesus College

Chapter 5 in China’s Rise, Russia’s Fall, 1995, pp 110-159 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract The limited discussion of the comparative performance of China and the USSR under reform1 has mostly assumed that the reason for the dramatic contrast in outcome can be explained mainly by the radically different starting points, with large differences in their respective capacities for ‘catching up, forging ahead and falling behind’, to use the terminology of Abramowitz (1986). The role of policy choice in politics and economics is given low explanatory weight.

Keywords: Foreign Direct Investment; Capital Stock; Foreign Investment; Cultural Revolution; Farm Sector (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1995
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-0-230-37836-0_5

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9780230378360

DOI: 10.1057/9780230378360_5

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().