The Transnational State and the Infrastructure Push

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    In 2010, the G20, in cooperation with major international organisations, launched a comprehensive effort – here labelled the infrastructure push – to promote infrastructure investments around the world. Using selected transnationalised elements from historical materialism, this is explained as a transnational state initiative to secure general material conditions for capitalist growth in a manner that is profoundly shaped by power relations. The infrastructure problem was allowed to grow during neoliberalism because of the hegemony of finance; the push is a result of and reflects a weakening of finance and strengthening of industrial interests in the transnational power bloc, as well as a strengthening of the emerging economies. This potential hegemonic project has gained the support of the global labour movement, while also has been subject to serious criticism from civil society organisations, speaking for the most vulnerable subaltern social forces. The empirical analysis also shows that the transnational state in this policy area works as a flexible, networked cooperation of G20 states and leading international organisations in ongoing dialogue with non-state actors, especially transnational business. In this cooperation, the international organisations have a relatively autonomous role in line with a historical materialist understanding of state apparatuses.
    In 2010, the G20, in cooperation with major international organisations, launched a comprehensive effort – here labelled the infrastructure push – to promote infrastructure investments around the world. Using selected transnationalised elements from historical materialism, this is explained as a transnational state initiative to secure general material conditions for capitalist growth in a manner that is profoundly shaped by power relations. The infrastructure problem was allowed to grow during neoliberalism because of the hegemony of finance; the push is a result of and reflects a weakening of finance and strengthening of industrial interests in the transnational power bloc, as well as a strengthening of the emerging economies. This potential hegemonic project has gained the support of the global labour movement, while also has been subject to serious criticism from civil society organisations, speaking for the most vulnerable subaltern social forces. The empirical analysis also shows that the transnational state in this policy area works as a flexible, networked cooperation of G20 states and leading international organisations in ongoing dialogue with non-state actors, especially transnational business. In this cooperation, the international organisations have a relatively autonomous role in line with a historical materialist understanding of state apparatuses.
    LanguageEnglish
    JournalNew Political Economy
    Volume23
    Issue number1
    Pages128-144
    Number of pages17
    ISSN1356-3467
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 2018

    Bibliographical note

    Published online: 27 Jul 2017

    Keywords

    • G20
    • Global governance
    • Historical materialism
    • Infrastructure
    • International organisations
    • power
    • State theory
    • Transnationalism

    Cite this

    @article{21395e0a500c41aeb20412431b41bcb4,
    title = "The Transnational State and the Infrastructure Push",
    abstract = "In 2010, the G20, in cooperation with major international organisations, launched a comprehensive effort – here labelled the infrastructure push – to promote infrastructure investments around the world. Using selected transnationalised elements from historical materialism, this is explained as a transnational state initiative to secure general material conditions for capitalist growth in a manner that is profoundly shaped by power relations. The infrastructure problem was allowed to grow during neoliberalism because of the hegemony of finance; the push is a result of and reflects a weakening of finance and strengthening of industrial interests in the transnational power bloc, as well as a strengthening of the emerging economies. This potential hegemonic project has gained the support of the global labour movement, while also has been subject to serious criticism from civil society organisations, speaking for the most vulnerable subaltern social forces. The empirical analysis also shows that the transnational state in this policy area works as a flexible, networked cooperation of G20 states and leading international organisations in ongoing dialogue with non-state actors, especially transnational business. In this cooperation, the international organisations have a relatively autonomous role in line with a historical materialist understanding of state apparatuses.",
    keywords = "G20, Global governance, Historical materialism, Infrastructure, International organisations, power, State theory, Transnationalism, G20, Global governance, Historical materialism, State theory, Transnationalism, International organisations, Infrastructure, Power",
    author = "Morten Ougaard",
    note = "Published online: 27 Jul 2017",
    year = "2018",
    doi = "10.1080/13563467.2017.1349085",
    language = "English",
    volume = "23",
    pages = "128--144",
    journal = "New Political Economy",
    issn = "1356-3467",
    publisher = "Routledge",
    number = "1",

    }

    The Transnational State and the Infrastructure Push. / Ougaard, Morten.

    In: New Political Economy, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2018, p. 128-144.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The Transnational State and the Infrastructure Push

    AU - Ougaard,Morten

    N1 - Published online: 27 Jul 2017

    PY - 2018

    Y1 - 2018

    N2 - In 2010, the G20, in cooperation with major international organisations, launched a comprehensive effort – here labelled the infrastructure push – to promote infrastructure investments around the world. Using selected transnationalised elements from historical materialism, this is explained as a transnational state initiative to secure general material conditions for capitalist growth in a manner that is profoundly shaped by power relations. The infrastructure problem was allowed to grow during neoliberalism because of the hegemony of finance; the push is a result of and reflects a weakening of finance and strengthening of industrial interests in the transnational power bloc, as well as a strengthening of the emerging economies. This potential hegemonic project has gained the support of the global labour movement, while also has been subject to serious criticism from civil society organisations, speaking for the most vulnerable subaltern social forces. The empirical analysis also shows that the transnational state in this policy area works as a flexible, networked cooperation of G20 states and leading international organisations in ongoing dialogue with non-state actors, especially transnational business. In this cooperation, the international organisations have a relatively autonomous role in line with a historical materialist understanding of state apparatuses.

    AB - In 2010, the G20, in cooperation with major international organisations, launched a comprehensive effort – here labelled the infrastructure push – to promote infrastructure investments around the world. Using selected transnationalised elements from historical materialism, this is explained as a transnational state initiative to secure general material conditions for capitalist growth in a manner that is profoundly shaped by power relations. The infrastructure problem was allowed to grow during neoliberalism because of the hegemony of finance; the push is a result of and reflects a weakening of finance and strengthening of industrial interests in the transnational power bloc, as well as a strengthening of the emerging economies. This potential hegemonic project has gained the support of the global labour movement, while also has been subject to serious criticism from civil society organisations, speaking for the most vulnerable subaltern social forces. The empirical analysis also shows that the transnational state in this policy area works as a flexible, networked cooperation of G20 states and leading international organisations in ongoing dialogue with non-state actors, especially transnational business. In this cooperation, the international organisations have a relatively autonomous role in line with a historical materialist understanding of state apparatuses.

    KW - G20

    KW - Global governance

    KW - Historical materialism

    KW - Infrastructure

    KW - International organisations

    KW - power

    KW - State theory

    KW - Transnationalism

    KW - G20

    KW - Global governance

    KW - Historical materialism

    KW - State theory

    KW - Transnationalism

    KW - International organisations

    KW - Infrastructure

    KW - Power

    UR - https://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=954921428684&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

    U2 - 10.1080/13563467.2017.1349085

    DO - 10.1080/13563467.2017.1349085

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 23

    SP - 128

    EP - 144

    JO - New Political Economy

    T2 - New Political Economy

    JF - New Political Economy

    SN - 1356-3467

    IS - 1

    ER -