What kind of innovation state matters for social justice? Learning from Poulantzas and going beyond

Author:

Papaioannou TheoORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn the twenty-first century, the notion of the state and its role in innovation and development have become dominant topics of theoretical and empirical inquiry. Although contemporary innovation theorists clearly unpack the myth of market fundamentalism in industrial policy and practice of neo-liberal states, they do not seem to explain precisely how come such states have been justified to play extensive roles in the economy. This paper provides a theoretical explanation by drawing lessons from Poulantzas’ approach to the state and going beyond it to consider alternatives. Accordingly, it conceives the innovation state as a result of the social division of labour and as a condensation of conflicting social relations which have their own materiality. The paper argues that whatever form the innovation state has taken in the western world since the industrial revolution, this has remained predominantly capitalist. Thus, it reproduces the social division of labour that is exploitative and unjust, delivering most benefits of innovation to dominant classes and excluding the very poor and the marginalised. The kind of innovation state that matters for social justice is a non-capitalist one, promoting pluralism of societies of equals through innovation.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science

Reference69 articles.

1. Amsden A (1989) Asia’s next giant: South Korea and late industrialisation. Oxford University Press, New York

2. Arvidsson A (2020) Capitalism and the commons. Theory Cult Soc 37(2):3–30

3. Block F (1987) ‘Beyond relative autonomy: state managers as historical subjects’ in Idem, Revising State Theory: Essays in Politics and Post-industrialism. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

4. Block F (2008) Swimming against the current: the rise of a hidden developmental state in the United States. Polit Soc 36(2):169–206

5. Block F (2013) Relational work and law: recapturing the legal realist critique of market fundamentalism. J Law Soc 40(1):27–48

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3