China, Vietnam and Laos are three of the few remaining communist regimes in the world. They are also among the fastest growing economies in the world, and indeed have been for some time (IMF 2019a). The fact that three of the best growth performers in global capitalism are authoritarian states led by communist parties with socialism as official development goal is certainly worthy of further study. The three countries indeed claim to have found their own model of development combining a market economy with socialism, what we based on communist party rhetoric summarize here as āthe socialist market economyā. According to official definitions, this is not capitalism, but a more sustainable and socially just way of making a market economy work for national development and the improvement of living standards.
China and Vietnam are by now considered major development success stories. China needs little further introduction in this regard, as few countries have received more attention in the development literature over the past decades (Lardy 2014, 2019; Naughton and Tsai 2015; Lin 2011; Steinfeld 2000; Huang 2008; Pei 2006; Yang 2004). Extreme levels of growth over four decades have seen China emerge as a global economic superpower. Vietnamās rapid development has also received significant attention (Earl 2018; Hansen 2015; Hiep 2012; Gainsborough 2010; London 2009; Ohno 2009; Beresford 2008; Masina 2006; Van Arkadie and Mallon 2003; Fforde and de Vylder 1996). Some observers even expect that it will develop into a leading Southeast Asian economic power (World Bank 2020; Beeson and Hung Hung Pham 2012). Laos is in many ways a different story from its communist neighbours. It remains one of the least studied and least understood countries in Asia (Rigg 2012), despite a growing Laos development literature (e.g. Kenney-Lazar 2019; Cole and Rigg 2019; Baird 2018; Friis and Nielsen 2016; Dwyer et al. 2015). Furthermore, few would consider Laos a development success story and its decades of very high levels of economic growth has largely gone under the radar of outside observers.
High GDP growth is just one side of the story, however. Even more impressively, growth in the socialist market economies, particularly China and Vietnam, has been converted into poverty eradication at a speed possibly unprecedented anywhere in the world (Malesky and London 2014). While the rapid development certainly has led to increasingly unequal societies also in the socialist market economies, they do perform better than countries at a similar level of income per capita on a wide range of social and material development indicators. In fact, China, Vietnam and Laos are all among the top ten fastest climbers upwards the UN Human Development Index over the 1990ā2015 period (UNDP 2016).
Given these development patterns, it is somewhat puzzling that the three countries have never been subject to thorough comparative analysis. Even China and Vietnam are rarely subject to such comparison (Malesky and London 2014; Womack 2006), although their development models and trajectories obviously share important traits. Laos is usually ignored altogether, and certainly not included in discussions of development in the two other socialist market economies. And, importantly, while many scholars have pointed out the discrepancy between official socialist ideology and developments on the ground (see London, this volume), no study has tried systematically to make sense of the model of the āsocialist market economyā that the three development success stories claim to be following.
This book thus sets out to fill an important lacuna in the literature, providing a comparative look at the development model of these three countries. With Xi Jinping at the 19th Party Congress in 2017 claiming that China is ready to take on the role as a model for other countries, it is now more relevant than ever to take a closer analytical look at the socialist market economy construct. During the global financial crisis in 2007ā2009, Beijing refrained from engaging in the debate about whether the so-called China Model was a more sustainable and development-friendly model than the market-liberal Washington Consensus. The leadership of Xi Jinping is less modest. On several occasions, Xi has suggested that other developing countries can adopt Chinaās growth model. In a world in dire need of new role models, can the Asian āsocialist market economiesā provide a realistic alternative for other developing countries? If Beijing is now willing to put money and resources into āexportingā its development model as part of an expanded southāsouth dialogue, an in-depth comparative examination of the socialist market economy models of China, Vietnam and Laos carries great significance.
We do not seek to elaborate or examine in depth the reasons for the relative success of the development models of China, Vietnam and Laos. Rather, the main purpose of the authors of this book is to further our understanding of what the socialist market economy construct is, in theory and practice. What features do the development models of China, Vietnam and Laos share and how do they differ? Are the developments in these three countries yet another example of Asian state-led developmentalism or something else completely?
Furthermore, are there any promises of more sustainable development models embedded in their nominally socialist projects? With all three countries increasingly integrated in the capitalist global economy, to what extent are these party states still pursuing a state-driven development? And how much socialism is actually left in these three countries beyond lofty party rhetoric? Finally, how has the stateāsociety relationship developed; in terms of labour, social policies and equality, and what is the role of the emerging middle classes in these countries?
This introductory chapter briefly presents the main developments in China, Vietnam and Laos over the recent decades and their performance on economic and social indicators, and discusses to what extent they are ādevelopment success storiesā. It furthermore places these cases in the literature on development as well as in the contemporary world economy. It discusses the socialist marke...