English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

One important issue which has recently captured the attention and the research eff orts of both economists and economic historians has been the debate about the diff erent forms of capitalism in the world today. The ‘variety of capitalism’ debate has involved scholars of diff erent fi elds, from fi nance to management, from corporate governance to industrial economics (La Porta et al. 1999; Whitley 1999; Whittington & Mayer 2000; Hall & Soskice 2001; Morck 2005; Baumol, Litan & Schramm 2007). It is not easy to establish the starting point of this debate, which undoubtedly goes back to the explanation of the diff erent paths of economic development (Gerschenkron 1962). The focus of the analysis was, from this perspective, mainly comparative. It tried to identify, by adopting a macroeconomic approach, the national – basically institutional – determinants of the different paths of growth. Implicitly (and sometimes explicitly), when the comparison involved the advanced (Western) countries, the explanation of the diff erent levels of development was linked to the internal structure of the country’s capitalist institutions, which regulated the economic system. Not surprisingly, this has recently become the favourite topic of those economic historians interested in the issue of the ‘great divergence’ between Europe and its Western off spring on the one hand, and India and China on the other (Pomeranz 2000; Maddison 2007). In this very last case, it is clear that the origins of this divergence are basically to be found in the affi rmation of a capitalist culture which was established well before the First Industrial Revolution (Landes 1998; Acemoglu et al. 2005). Then, taking the Western lead for granted, the rise – and the fall – of the European champions has been seen as a neverending competition about more and more effi cient sets of institutions which regulate, enforce and strengthen national models of capitalism (North 1990; 2005). By identifying technical change as a key factor in the process of economic growth, another interpretation, following a Schumpeterian approach, provides a

Introduction: Forms of Enterprise in 20th Century Italy