Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/53112 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2001
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
WIDER Discussion Paper No. 2001/38
Verlag: 
The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Helsinki
Zusammenfassung: 
Botswana and Zimbabwe represent two cases of differential access to the world economy. Notwithstanding its lack of diversification and its reliance on a primary mineral export, Botswana has prospered while Zimbabwe has fallen into a deep crisis. Historical and comparative evidence allows us to transcend the superficial presumption common to much policy discourse, namely, that the basis for success depends upon adherence to the ‘Washington Consensus’ export-oriented strategy, or to good governance, or even to geographical considerations. We argue instead that there are much deeper problems and possibilities that Botswana and Zimbabwe unveil, which relate largely to developmental linkages and aspects of agency.
Schlagwörter: 
sub-Saharan Africa
critique of the Washington consensus
JEL: 
F13
F43
O19
O49
O54
O55
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
126.32 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.