International Relations and Productive Systems

Abstract

From the outset Destanne de Bernis has sought to reinterpret systematically in regulationist terms the history of international economic relations since the nineteenth century (Bye and Destanne de Bernis, 1977, pp. 317–55, 632–1059; 1987, pp. 496–726, 978–1296). Grenoble theory’s thrust is to insist on the study of relations within and among productive systems, and not of relations among nations. Alternating periods of stable accumulation (regulation) and crisis mark the evolution of productive systems and determine the content of relations within and among such systems. When a mode of regulation operates efficiently, economic relations within a productive system are qualitatively different from relations between productive systems. According to the Grenoble Group each productive system possesses its particular international division of labour; therefore there are in theory as many international divisions of labour as productive systems. Within a productive system one nation exercises its domination over other nations. The ensemble of productive systems comprises global economic space. When a mode of regulation is in crisis, individual productive systems are destructured. Economic ties among states within a productive system become looser, and boundaries between productive systems more fluid. Simultaneously the dominant nation within the productive system suffers under the impact of international economic forces and the national productive system loses its cohesion. The solution to the current economic crisis therefore demands the reconstitution of the French productive system and the development of autonomous productive systems in the Third World.