Abstract
This paper analyses the continuities and discontinuities regarding the concept of structural change in Latin American structuralism and neo-structuralism and considers the global context in which these ideas and their variations are produced. In this sense, the transformations of capitalism from 1950 onwards are taken into account as are the diagnoses and strategies promoted by the ECLAC to ultimately achieve structural change through structuralism and neo-structuralism. How the role of the state is conceived in each of these contexts and the consequences derived from state intervention to promote the structural change are also analysed.
Publisher
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
Reference83 articles.
1. Arrighi, G. (1994). The long twentieth century: Money, power, and the origins of our times. London: Verso.
2. Barletta, F., & Yoguel, G. (2017). ¿De qué hablamos cuando hablamos de cambio estructural? In M. Abeles, M. Cimoli, & P. Lavarello (Eds.), Manufactura y cambio estructural. Aportes para pensar la política industrial en la Argentina (pp. 27–54). Santiago de Chile: Naciones Unidas.
3. Bielschowsky, R. (1998). Cincuenta años de pensamiento de la CEPAL. Revista de La CEPAL, (Número Extraordinario), 21-46.
4. Bitar, S. (1988). Neoliberalismo versus neoestructuralismo en América Latina. Revista de La CEPAL, (34), 45-64.
5. Bossier, S. (1994) Crisis y alternativas en los procesos de regionalización. Revista de la CEPAL, (52), 179-190.