Adam Fforde – författare

This clear and accessible text explores Vietnam's successful transition from neo-Stalinist central planning to a market economy—"Vietnamese style." After describing the north Vietnamese system prior to 1975 and its colonial and precolonial antecedents, the authors uncover the mechanisms of that changeover. They contend that the Vietnamese transition was largely bottom-up in character and that it evolved over a long enough period for the country's political economy to adjust. This explains in part the rapid shift to a high-growth, externally oriented development path in the early 1990s, despite the loss of Soviet aid and the lack of significant Western substitutes until 1992-1993. Based upon extensive incountry experience, a wealth of primary materials, and wide comparative knowledge of development issues, the book challenges many preconceived notions, both about Vietnam and about the general nature of transition processes.

This clear and accessible text explores Vietnam's successful transition from neo-Stalinist central planning to a market economy—"Vietnamese style." After describing the north Vietnamese system prior to 1975 and its colonial and precolonial antecedents, the authors uncover the mechanisms of that changeover. They contend that the Vietnamese transitio

Important parts of development practice, especially in key institutions such as the World Bank, are dominated by economists. In contrast, Development Studies is largely based upon multidisciplinary work in which anthropologists, human geographers, sociologists, and others play important roles. Hence, a tension has arisen between the claims made by Development Economics to be a scientific, measurable discipline prone to wide usage of mathematical modelling, and the more discursive, practice based approach favoured by Development Studies.The aim of this book is to show how the two disciplines have interacted, as well as how they differ. This is crucial in forming an understanding of development work, and to thinking about why policy recommendations can often lead to severe and continuing problems in developing countries. This book introduces Development Economics to those coming from two different but linked perspectives; economists and students of development who are not economists. In both explaining and critiquing Development Economics, the book is able to suggest the implications of these findings for Development Studies, and more broadly, for development policy and its outcomes.

Important parts of development practice, especially in key institutions such as the World Bank, are dominated by economists. In contrast, Development Studies is largely based upon multidisciplinary work in which anthropologists, human geographers, sociologists, and others play important roles. Hence, a tension has arisen between the claims made by Development Economics to be a scientific, measurable discipline prone to wide usage of mathematical modelling, and the more discursive, practice based approach favoured by Development Studies.The aim of this book is to show how the two disciplines have interacted, as well as how they differ. This is crucial in forming an understanding of development work, and to thinking about why policy recommendations can often lead to severe and continuing problems in developing countries. This book introduces Development Economics to those coming from two different but linked perspectives; economists and students of development who are not economists. In both explaining and critiquing Development Economics, the book is able to suggest the implications of these findings for Development Studies, and more broadly, for development policy and its outcomes.

This volume investigates why peasants defend themselves against the predations of politics by using such "everyday" forms of protest as footdragging, feigned ignorance, false compliance, etc. With a cross-section of countries, historical time periods, and ideologies, the case studies illustrate the variety of forms of everyday peasant resistance and their consequences.

This book, first published in 1987, examines the experience of the North Vietnamese economy during the struggle for national reunification and the Vietnam war. It chronicles the impact of war and Socialist Construction upon an extremely poor area left undeveloped by French colonial exploitation. The analysis focuses on the severe restraints that faced socio-economic development in North Vietnam, and the adverse effects of forced development based upon neo-Stalinist institutional models. Deep problems were encountered in attempting to implement Socialist Construction in the North, and wartime aid from fraternal Socialist countries masked the fundamental economic imbalances created by the development effort. After national reunification in 1975 the structural difficulties of the Northern economy and the shortcomings of its economic management system crushed the expectations of rapid peacetime development and led to the economic crisis of the late 1970s.

This book, first published in 1987, examines the experience of the North Vietnamese economy during the struggle for national reunification and the Vietnam war. It chronicles the impact of war and Socialist Construction upon an extremely poor area left undeveloped by French colonial exploitation. The analysis focuses on the severe restraints that faced socio-economic development in North Vietnam, and the adverse effects of forced development based upon neo-Stalinist institutional models. Deep problems were encountered in attempting to implement Socialist Construction in the North, and wartime aid from fraternal Socialist countries masked the fundamental economic imbalances created by the development effort. After national reunification in 1975 the structural difficulties of the Northern economy and the shortcomings of its economic management system crushed the expectations of rapid peacetime development and led to the economic crisis of the late 1970s.

This book debunks the foundations of contemporary government-led development policy. The author questions the predictability of success when using mainstream development doctrines and its underlying assumptions, approaching development from a sceptical standpoint, as opposed to the more common optimistic view.