Embedded Autonomy, Evans Analysis

Andrea M. Gradiz
Introduction to International Development
2012-11-13

EMBEDDED AUTONOMY: STATES AND INDUSTRIAL TRANSFORMATION

“How a state variation define developmental outcomes?”According to Evans three classifications of state can be found, Predatory, Developmental and the Intermediate states. Each of this states are characterize by the autonomy grade of their government. Ourinterpretation will Depend on the definition we apply on the concept Autonomy; if we consider autonomy as “not having its goals shaped by societal forces” then we can say that an Embedded Autonomyconstitutes a Predatory state, but if Autonomy “implies the ability to formulate collective goals instead of allowing office holders to pursue their individual interest” then we are referring aboutDevelopmental State. Another way to say it would be Predatory State equals Enclosed Autonomy and Developmental State equals Integrated Autonomy. Let’s defined the characteristics implied on the two extremevariations of State.
A Predatory State have an Isolated Government; an Impediment of economic improvement; weak cohesion of traditional collectivities; no bureaucracy; poor policies. This makes difficultor maybe impossible for a transformation towards development. An Industrial Structure Policy, Meritocratic Bureaucracy, organize civil society, institutions specifically for economic growth and thearticulation between this two are some of the characteristics of a Developmental State. What about those characteristics that made a predatory and/or a Developmental state emerge? Predatory state arelikely to emerge in societies where: Benefits of Political Power are large; those which are well endowed with natural resources; those badly endowed with factors which are complementary to publicinvestment, such as human capital; and those untrinsically unstable. Developmental States are generated in those countries with “relatively high human capital and lack of natural resources” and after a...