Forty-eight slides used in the presentation of a 16 session course of the same name. Begins with and introduction to the global political economy as the setting for corporate foreign investment and trade. The slides enable to course to be followed and provide examples, critical analysis and new information..

1. Politics of Corporate
Investment,
Trade and Global Governance
This a Slideshare version of the slides
provided by J. Harrod to the University of
Amsterdam November 2012.

2. What is Global Political Economy?
• course is about power - therefore realist and critical
global political economy includes all sources of global power
-the corporation
-non-governmental organisations – civic, religious, social, political
• global political economy as the study of:
…….the material the interface between nations, peoples, and societies
or…. the material underpinnings of international relations – conflict war and peace
or … the joining of power and greed
or … who gets what, when, how (at the global level) (H. Lasswell)
The material aspects permits the three key questions of hegemony and power:
Who benefits?
why now?
what’s missing
1/2

3. The Structure of the Global Political Economy 2009 (1)
The Biggest Economies by GDP Energy Dependency: GDP Per Head
Percentage of Energy
Imported
USA 14.119 billion 29 45,990
Japan 5.069 82 39,740
China 4.985 7 4,986
Germany 3.330 59 40,670
Note
India 1.337 24 1,190
Netherlands .792 24 47,920
Italy 2,113 85 35,080
(1) Source: Economist Pocket World in Figures 2012
1/3

4. 3) Models of Political Economy
The transactions in global political economy are between often highly differentiated
societies which adhere to designated models economy
At its most simple a model of a political economy is the specific manner in which
production and distribution is organised within any one society.
But a model may be influence by culture, historic structures, geography and all
the variables which make distinctive societies.
Currently discussion has been centered on :-
the Anglo-American Model,
the European Model,
the Asian Development Model
And varieties as the Polder model (Netherlands)
the Nordic Model (Sweden)
,
the core material aspects of a model can be considered as production, the
manner, form and nature of it, and work the manner of it and the conditions
of which it is undertaken
Dimensions of a Political Economy 1/4

5. The Four Great Transactions
What links these disparate entities?
the primordial linkage between them are the
four great transactions between societies
money, goods, people, and ideas
the linkage between the transactions and societies is one of the principal
non-state actors in international relations - the multinational corporation
* international politics is affected or determined by corporate
investment and trade
* the agencies of global governance, in the broadest sense, control
or enhance the political role of mnc
1/5

6. Session 2.
Corporate Foreign Direct Investment
(FDI)

7. Session 2: Corporate Foreign Investment (FDI)
8 slides
1. Demystifying capital – capital easy to understand using a simple “workers
in field” model
2. Preliminary Overview of Theories of Corporate FDI
3. Who Owns it? External Stocks of Multinational Corporate Investment
1985- 2011
4. Where Does it Go? Internal Stocks of Multinational Corporate Investment
2011
5 Example: USA-Headquartered Corporations Stock of Investment in the
World - 2011 by country
6 Number of Global Corporations By Country and Economic Size
7 Investment and Politics – The Risk Connection
8 Conflict and Return to Capital - Oil in the Middle East

8. STABLE
10 persons working a field Produces
2 for reproduction (decline in
women’s productivity around childbirth
+ provision for children during their
unproductive years)
8 for consumption
Produces
2 for reproduction
7 for consumption Restriction of
consumption for capital = making fork
1 for capital – making fork
Produces
2 for reproduction
8 for consumption
(same as stable stage)
+ 2 surplus
INNOVATION
10 persons working field and
creating capital - a fork
GROWTH
10 persons + capital
DEMYSTIFYING CAPITAL J. Harrod
Save
Finance?
Consume
But by
whom?
Invest but
how?
Marx – capitalists use to produce
more and acquire more for themselves
B&N No! – not only to produce but to
make conditions for future returns
Neo-Classical – market use to produce
more and distribute

9. Preliminary Overview Theories of Corporate FDI
• Neo-classical – investment of profits and investment climate
• Marxist version of neo-classical – vent for surplus
• Institutionalist – (Hobson, Schumpeter) monopolies and oligopolies create
expansionist institutions
• Imperialist – (Nkrumah) increasing economic and political power
• Hegemonic – enhancing model imitation
• Global realism – (Harrod, Strange) corporate power-seeking domestic and global
by sector and general
• Capital as power – (Bichler and Nitzan) maximizing returns through power over
future conditions
Corporate FDI
portfolio and direct (difference = control or power)
stock = book value of investment held in a country in any one year

10. WHO OWNS IT?
EXTERNAL STOCKS OF MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION
INVESTMENTS
Stocks of Foreign Direct Investment 1985 and 2011
Stocks and Country % of Total
1985
Millions $
% of
Total
2011
Millions $
% of
Total
World 707,786 210,168,489
USA 251,034 35 4,499,962 21
Japan 43,970 6 962 790 4.5
Germany 59,909 8 1,441 611 6.8
UK 100,313 14 1,245 038 5.8
Netherlands 60,731 8.5 943,068 4.4
South Korea 526 0.07 159,339 0.7
China 15 .002 365,981 1.7
Malaysia 414 0.06 106,207 0.5
Brazil 5,826 0.7 202,586 0.9
Poland (1990) 109 na 68.061 0.32
Nigeria 8 0.001 5,865 0.03
Developed
Economies
663,456 97 17,055,964 80
Source: UNCTAD World Investment Report 2012 Annex Table 1.2 pp. 173-176

11. WHERE DOES IT GO?
INTERNAL STOCKS OF MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION
INVESTMENTS 2011
Developed economies 13,055,903 63%
Developing Economies 3,705,410 32%
Selected Countries GDP
Japan 225,782 5,869
Germany 713,706 3,557
Ireland 243,484 217
Malaysia 114,585 287
Sources:UNCTAD World Investment Report 2012 Annex Table 1.2 pp 173-176
GDP: CIA World Fact Book 21012 (estimations 2011 official exchange rate)

12. Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis: K. B. Barefoot and M. Ibarra-Caton
“Direct Investment Position for 2009: Country and Industry Detail” July 2012, p19
Example: USA-Headquartered Corporations Stock of
Investment in the World - 2011 by country

13. Corporation per
US$ 100b GDP
Number
Corporations
Switzerland 2.3 15
United Kingdom 1.5 38
Canada 1.4 25
United States 1.1 173
Netherlands .9 8
Australia .9 14
France .8 23
Japan .6 36
Germany .5 19
Italy .3 8
BRICs
China .08 10
India .7 12
Brazil .05 12
Russia .5 10
Number of Global Corporations By Country and Economic Size
Top Ten Headquarter States and BRICs
Notice 1) Small countries with large corporations puts up size per capita.
2) Low position of Germany and high position of UK .
Sources: Corporations Financial Times 500 (FT500) global corporations 2012 by market capitalisation
GDP: CIA World Fact book 21012 (estimations 2011 official exchange rate except China = PPP)

14. POLITICAL RISK FOR INVESTMENT
(sample from internet (2006)
Country Risk Guide (ICRG) The PRS Group, New York
contains data from 1984 to the present.
A = Government Stability G= Military in Politics
B= Socioeconomic Conditions H= Religious Tensions
C= Investment profile I= Law and Order
D= Internal Conflict J= Ethnic Tensions
E= External Conflict K= Democratic Accountability
F= Corruption L= Bureaucratic Quality
Country
Rnk A B C D E F G H I J K L
Max.
score
12 12 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Norway 1 6.5 10 11.5 11.5 11.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 4.5 6.0 4.0
Netherl
ands
13 8.5 10 12 10 12 5 6 2.5 6 4.5 6.0 4.0
USA 10 10 8 11.5 10.5 8.0 5 4 5.5 5 5 6 4
Mexico 65 6.5 8 11.5 10 11 2 4.5 5.5 3 3 6 3
Taiwan 19 7.5 9 11.5 10 8.5 3 5 5 5 3 5 2.5
Notice: political factors are given – but how far are they created?
Investment and Politics – The Risk Connection

15. Conflict and Return to Capital - Oil in the Middle East
According to this chart and authors every time the oil corporations returns go down there is a
conflict in the Middle East which makes the returns go up.
Source: Bichler, S. and
Nitzan. J. 2004 “ Dominant
Capital and the New Wars.”
Journal of World-Systems
Research 10(2) p.311

16. Session 3. The Politics of
Trade and Corporate
Traders

17. The Politics of Trade
• In global political economy trade is not seen as a politically neutral
economic transaction
There are winners and losers in every trading transaction
- the government and state in terms of security, alliances
hegemony
- the groups, corporations involved in the transaction
• multinational corporations control directly or indirectly 75% of global
trade
• trade as an extensions of headquarter state power
- trade dependency – indebtedness
As a determinant of social/political structure and processes
- which income group receives main benefit?
- which income group consumes goods ?
10/2

18. Traditional Trade Theory: Comparative Cost
•. Ricardo and Comparative Cost
- static - dynamic problem
- Ricardo writing 1817 of UK - Portugal trade
- but Treaty Methuen 1703 fixed trade of wine for textiles
- 1790 slave-produced cotton
- 1810 UK industrial export cotton cloth
• political assumptions of comparative cost
- labour market - determined by supply and demand for labour
- product market/industrial interest
- rational choice of production
- military/international relations not involved
• power model of trade pattern development
10/3

19. Propensity to
produce
Propensity
to consume
Propensity to
consume
Propensity to
produce
Dominant Power over Both Political Economies
Political Economy A Political Economy B
A Power Model of Trade Pattern Creation 10/5

20. The Ideological Power of the “Free” Trade Argument
- “free trade” promotes, open society and exchange
of ideas
- protectionism means authoritarian rule
- “free trade” and internationalism
Director-General of World Trade Organisation, Pascal Lamy, in a lecture at the
University of California, Berkeley,
29 October 2008 said
"I would only say that restoring citizens' confidence in trade
requires governments to ensure that sound domestic policies are in place. It is
reassuring, however, to see that both Presidential candidates have indicated that
concluding the Doha Round is an important economic priority and that both reject
protectionist solutions to US economic difficulties.“
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/sppl_e/sppl105_e.htm
So… he admitted citizens were not confident of the benefits of free trade . Why?
Because free trade is not free and under current corporate concentration simply
transfers wealth from one people to another as in the power model.

21. Power model of international trade
• Thus combining created production with created demand
• consider: colonial trade was largely in mildly addictive drugs , that is to
say consumption would tend to continue whatever the price
- tea, coffee, sugar, chocolate,
opium – failed
• How Free is “Free” Trade today? Examples
• Sector concentration by multinational corporation
- commodity trade – for example banana’s and oligopoly (see slide)
• subsidized and promoted – see for example the increase in Vietnams
coffee production after support from international agencies and other
subsidies (see slide)
• Corporate weight- Wal-Mart and China Trade
- 8th
largest “trading entity” greater than Russia
10/6

22. World market shares of banana companies
1966 1972 1980 1992 1995 1997 1999 2007
Chiquita 34 30.5 28.7 34 >25 24-25 25 25
Dole 12.3 18 21.2 20 22-23 25-26 25 26
Del Monte 16 1.1 5.5 15.4 15 15-16 16 15
Top 3 47.4 54 65.3 69 62-64 65-67 65 66
Fyfes 2-3 7-8 6-7 7-8 8
Noboa 12 13 11 12
Top 5 70 80 82 86 84 86
Source: The World Banana Economy, 1985-2002, FAO (data from 1966 to 1999), Banana
link (for 2007 data)
The whole process, Sir Leon Brittian, then EU Trade Commissioner, told
BBC2’ s the Money Programme. “Is being driven by politics in the United
States. It is driven by the fact that Chiquita is a company that gives money
to the political parties, that the president of Chiquita is very close to
Senator Trent Lott.” (1999)
http://www.newsdominica.com/articles/articles.cfm?Id=1884
10/7

23. Coffee Exporters 1990-
2000With World Bank help Vietnam went from 2% to 10% of total world exports in 10 years
10/8

24. •
“Wal-Mart is the largest single U.S. importer of Chinese goods,
accounting for 15 percent of our total imports of Chinese consumer
products. The numbers are huge: over $30 billion in annual imports
from China, representing about 80% of the company’s total imports. It
would almost be accurate to say that China doesn’t have a trade
surplus with the United States; it has one with Wal-Mart.”
http://www.emergingmarketsoutlook.com/?p
•
•the state-corporation problem in multilateral trade agreements

25. Trade Dependency 2010
1 (selected countries – calculated from US$ values)
% Exports to GDP
(2004)
USA 8.76
Japan 14.1%
Germany 38%
France 20%
UK 18%
Netherlands 63%
Italy 21%
Ireland 57%
India 15%
China 26%
Venezuela 17%
Kenya 16%
Hungary 72%
Main Export Destination
Canada 19.4%
USA 19.4%
France 9.5%
Germany 15%
USA 10.4 Germany 10.1
Germany 30%
Germany 13 France 11%
USA 21%, UK 15.3%
Un. Arb. Emir. 11.6%
USA 18%
USA 40.2%
Uganda 10%
Germany 25%
Source: Economist Pocket World in Figures 2013
Main Import Imported Energy
Origin as % Total
China 20% 23%
China 22.4.4% 80%
Netherlands 13.4% 60%
Germany 19% 49%
Germany 12.6% 19%
Germany 18% 19%
Germany 15.9% 84%
UK 37.4% 89%
China 11.7% 26%
Japan 12.6% 8%
USA 28% -204 %
India 14.7% 17%
Germany 24% 56%

26. Country Consumption
per head
(kg oil
equivalent)
USA 7.0
Japan 3.8
Germany 3.9
China 1.7
UK 3.2
France 4.0
Italy 2.7
Brazil 2.3
India 0,5
Netherlands 4.7
Kenya 0.5
Hungary 2.5
Chile 1.7
Source: Economist Pocket World in Figures 2013
Resource Dependency: Energy (2010)

27. Towards Managed Trade
The reciprocity principle in multilateral trade agreements
WTO - TRIPS and TRIMS - the elephant and mice problem
Bilateral Free Trade Agreements - again elephants and mice
Thus combination of:-
multinational direct and indirect control
sector concentration,
international financial institutions assistance/demands
bilateral free trade agreements
regional arrangements
results in a “managed trade”
reality is now power bargaining in which state and corporation use the free
trade ideology

28. Law, Trade and Politics: Vocabulary and
Relationships
Source: J.Harrod, Lectures, University Amsterdam, 2009

29. Session 4: The Modern Corporation

30. The Corporation in a Political Framework
• In this session the subject is “the corporation” rather than a multinational
corporation
• The politics surrounding the corporation must deal with three entry point – power of
the corporation in relation to headquarter state, power of the corporation in relation to
host country in foreign corporate investment and power over populations (media,
values, institutional patterns etc)
• different size and distribution of large corporations
absolute numbers consult previous data slides and/or FT Global 500itzerland
• corporate size – for political scientists revenue/sales/turnover the key indicator for
power

31. Corporation Turnover Country Budget
Shell 454 Netherlands 420
Wal-mart 446 India 376
Merk 48 Hungary 19
Japan
Tobacco
29 Malawi 12
Boeing 68 Poland 100
Lukoil 101 Russia 308
Pepsi 66 Mexico 672
Deutsche
Telekom
75 Germany 1,588
Danone 25 France 1,535
Corporations Turnover compared with Government Budget
Billions US $
Sources: Turnover = FT Global 500 2012 (Turnover figures 2011): Government expenditure: CIA
World Factbook – compiled in Wikipedia “Government Budget by Country” figures from 2011

32. The Modern Corporation
The modern corporation is a large productive organisation usually holding a
dominant position in the sector in which it operates
Transformation by Concentration
• concentration in the different sectors has transformed the corporation in the
last 30 years
- concentration accompanied by market-fundamentalist ideology
-sustained perception of corporate as a creature of the market and
competitively sanctioned
• Levels of concentration
•From 90% control of global “market” e.g. Microsoft and disc-operating system to
- “only” 20% for Michelin in car tires
•Monopoly, duopoly ,oligopoly and monospony – the 4-40 concentration ration
•Speight “oligopoly… better analyzed in terms of military strategy than in profit
maximization and the marginal principle” (1960)
6/4

33. • concentration almost alone has transformed the corporation from an enterprise to
an organisation
• Impact of this transformation
1. Classical theories of capitalism become outmoded
• - Smith and maintenance of competition
• - Marx and the organic concentration of capital
2. Competition v. market share maintenance and acquisition
• -oligopoly price theory and market share maintenance
3. from profit-making to rent-seeking
• - crucial to understand the political actions of the multinational
• - economists use rent in relation to manipulation of prices in monopoly
• - political economist emphasizes seeking changes in political legal
environment
• - changing the investment climate
From profit-making to rent-seeking

34. if market-based theories of corporate behaviour insufficient what are the
Alternatives?
A) capital theories
- classical theories
rational location and profit maximization
- neo-capitalist theories modes of accumulation
labour control focus,
- monopoly capitalism – still “vent for surplus”
- new capital theories
Bichler&Nitzen, financialisation
Theories of Corporate Behaviour

35. B) organization theories
- core of management literature
Weberian bureaucracy in private sector?
Veblen and managerial capitalism
-organizational systemic
Michel's iron law and goal displacement
- corporate governance models Anglo-American,
European Japan, China
- stakeholders and distributional battles
employees, shareholders, management
The corporation as an organisation: corporate social responsibility v “the
business of business is business”
Theories of Corporate Behaviour (cont.)

36. ession 5: Multinational Corporations

37. Intro: Multinational Global Power
• now dealing with multinational corporations rather than corporation
although some aspects of power are not different
• multinational corporation versus transnational corporation
there is more to a nomenclature
• transnational corporations = border dissolving
• multinational corporations = border exploiting
• differences between corporations
- relative size to each other
relative to headquarter state
- sector concentration

38. Rank Corporation
Revenue
$ Billion
85 Nokia 74,224
86 Marathon Oill 73,504
87 Hyundai Motor 72,542
88 Costo Wholesale 72,483
89 Rwe 71,851
90 Home Depot 71,288
91 AmerisourceBergen 70,594
92
Industrial & Comercial
Bank of China
70,568
93
Archer Daniels
Midland
69,816
95 Munich re Group 67,515
94 Vodafone 69,138
96 Nippon Life Insurance 66,621
97 Toshiba 66,239
98 Robert Bosch 66,052
99
China Mobile
Communication
65,015
100 Target 64,948
Source: Fortune 500 2009 http://www.business.com; Budgets CIA World Factbook 2009
Fortune 100 Top and Bottom 15 by Revenue
Rank Corporation Revenue
$ billion
1 Royal Durch Shell 458,361
2 Exxon Mobile 442,851
3 Wal-Mart Stores 405,607
4 BP 367,053
6 Total 234,674
7 Conoco Phillips 230,764
8 ING Group 226,577
9 Sinopec 207,814
10 Toyota Motor 204,352
12 General Electric 183,207
13
China National
Petroleum
181,123
14 Volkswagen 166,579
15 State-Grid 164,136
Compare Government Budgets
Netherlands $372b; Colombia $72b; Indonesia $97b; Kenya $9b:

39. Selected Corporations Sales and Employment
Corporation Sales/Revenue
$ billions
Employees
Pharmaceuticals
Bayer 48,149 108.000
Hoffman-La
Roche
43, 970 78,000
Novartis 41,460 98,200
Food
McDonalds 22,140 400.000
Tires/Rubber
Michelin 16,540 117,000
Bridgestone 29,700 133,000
Goodyear 19,600 70,000
Sources: Fortune 500: Wikipedia Corporation Profiles,2009

40. Top 100 Multinational’s Foreign Sales
by Headquarter Country (2007)
Headquarter
Country
No.
MNC's in
Top 100
GDP
$ billions
Foreign
Sales
$ Billions
% Foreign
Sales to
GDP
Netherlands 6 776 241 31
United Kingdom 16 2,772 678 24
Switzerland 4 424 186 22
Germany 12 3,317 642 19
Japan 10 4,384 507 12
USA 20 13,751 1,212 9
Italy 2 2,102 136 2
MNC data = The World's Top 100 non-financial TNCs, Unctad: World Investment Report 2009, p. 225
GDP = Economist: Pocket World in Figures 2010
Note: headquarters Netherlands/UK divided 50/50%; headquarters Australia/UK divided 30/70%;
headquarters USA/Germany divided 50/50%:

41. Multinational Corporate Power – Domestic Level
• relationship to state crucial for both headquarter global power
• the corporation as an institution of the 21 century (recap)
the institutions of in state/society
- the church – material power via spiritual service
- the state – taxation and enforcement
- the modern corporation – rent and manipulation
• rationalities, ideologies and transformation
formal relationship with state/government
- private entity in “market”
- production - civil society – state administration
- importance of civil society as corporation free political space?

42. (cont) Power relationship with state/government
• how far does corporation, influence, control or dominate governments?
- conclusive evidence difficult
- by corporate resistance to investigation
- the political divide – anti-corporate v pro-business
• gradual merger of corporate and government elites
- ex-corporate leadership examples: USA, Mexico, Italy, etc
- increased interchange between corporate and government
personnel
• corporation has dramatically increased power over state policy starting in the
last quarter of 20th century

43. A) l capital theories
- classical theories
rational location and profit maximization
- theories of imperialism
Hobson – Marxist-Leninist
- new capital theories
dominant capital and – Bichler&Nitzen
B) technological and resource theories
- product cycle theory (Vernon)
shift from labour to capital intensive
- geo-political-materialist
– resource seeking
- resource dependency and resource curse
Theories of Foreign Involvements, Power and Consequences

44. Definition: Any model, institution or arrangement or an order, command, policy
derived from one circumstance may not function as expected or desired in
another
• two types
(1) – imposition of a model
it has been noticed historically and currently that any hegemon, be it state,
corporation, non-governmental organisation, or church, acting globally tends to
attempt to replicate itself
2) - dysfunctional/inappropriate demands
the insistence that procedures and practices should follow the pattern of distant
the power-holders produces dysfunction and stress
• Contemporary rise of the corporation, regionalism, global economic governance
and regimes change raises same problems
Imperial Dysfunction

45. “…: he (the Prince of Orange) introduced into England the system of Dutch
finance. The principle of that system was to mortgage industry in order to
protect property; abstractly nothing can be conceded more unjust: its
practice in England has been equally injurious. In Holland, with a small
population engaged in the same pursuits, in fact, a nation of bankers,
the system was adapted to the circumstance which had created it ...
All shared in the present spoil and therefore could endure the future burthen
but applied to a country in which the circumstances were entirely
different .... it has ended in the degradation of a fettered and
burthened multitude.”
B. Disraeli Sybil ,or: The Two Nations (1845) (Penguin 1954) p.30
Imperial Dysfunction example 1:
Disraeli and Dutch Financial System 1689

46. "Opel's organisational structure is very dysfunctional. It loosely combines a design and'
developmnent centre, a gearbox production, a car assembly operation and a sales unit," says
Christoph Sturmer, analyst at IRS Global Insight.
In the past, local managers often did not have much to say when it came to product decisions.
One example is GM's decision a few years ago to sell in Europe the Antara - a sports utility
vehicle built at the GM Daewoo joint venture in South Korea.
Opel managers look back with anger at this decision, as they favoured reviving the
German carmaker's Frontera, a sports utility vehicle that was sold until 2004. "The Antara
does not fit the regional needs in Europe and was not accepted by many Frontera
customers. Its driving quality bears too much resemblance to a pure off-road vehicle," one
manager said.
Opel's financing structure is another matter. Before March this year, the various European
units did not even have their own cash management. "Every country unit was always on the
verge of liquidation, as they depended on getting the cash needed to operate from Detroit
each morning," Mr Sturmer says…
Imperial Dysfunction: Example 2: from the Financial Times 14.11.2009 p.12
News Analysis, OPEL FIGHTS TO KEEP SEAT OF POWER
Despite GM's vows,I fears remain that authority will stay in Detroit,
writes Daniel Schafer

47. Multinational Corporate Power in Global Political Economy
Direct exercise of Power
• corporation to country via direct investment
• corporation in unilateral, bilateral or triangular diplomacy
• corporation in a regime
a regime is a global political space in which a number of globally operating
organizations and persons interact and produce practices, rules, norms, and
information
a sector regime involves corporations, sector associations, non-governmental
organisation (ngo’s) , international governmental organisations (ingo’s),
governments and governmental agencies, organised crime
- dominant corporations in sector usually most powerful
an issue regime typically involves corporations, advocacy groups, ingo’s, ngo’s,
governments and governmental agencies, inter-state organisations, powerful
individuals

48. (Cont.) Indirect Exercise of Power:
• through globally operating organisations
International Employers Association
International Chamber of Commerce
Round Table of Industrialists
“Clubs” and “meetings”
Sector and Trade Organisations
• in alliance with headquarter state or subsidiary state
- corporate interest and national interest (FDI)
- state-corporate alliance for strategic issues – resources
- state-corporate alliance for global state expenditure
defense
development
reconstruction destruction reconstruction cycle