New institutions of reform process; investment advisory councils

Abstract

After the 1970s crises of capitalist system, profit rates of the capitalist were decreasing rapidly. In early capitalized countries all investment areas were not as profitable as it used to be. These countries, capitalists, need to find new investment areas and markets. Simultaneously late capitalized countries need more capital and investments in their economy. The needs of two sides are overlapping in the same period, but late capitalized country economies have high risks for capitalist class. Their laws and rules were not compatible with early capitalized countries. For this reason, foreign investment regimes have became an important topic for the late capitalized and early capitalized countries since 1970s. Since it was a necessity to establish proper structures as parallel to the aim of drawing more and more investment to the countries, the concept of ‘Improving investment climate’ gained a dominant position in debates on investment. The concept itself mainly refers to consisting necessary conditions in order for giving a new impetus to accumulation of capital. The institutions which run all these works have been named as Investment Advisory Councils. These Councils are also known as governance bodies which have actively been functioning in many countries in the last decade. These Councils are the most important institutions of reform process. Although these Councils have common targets, each institution in invidual countries has different characteristics specific to its own structure. In this study we are trying to define the concept of investment climate and main institution of ‘second generation‘ reform process. There is a big consensus in development studies of World Bank, IMF and OECD organisations. They argue that improving investment climate studies are for prosperity of everyone. In this study we are trying to show this process creates some loosers and winners. IAC institutions receive strong support from international organizations as well, it is possible to argue that improving investment climate in single countries is for the general interest of entire capitalist class. Ironically, these Councils define their targets as to make their countries the most competitive economy. Thus, it is apparent that two opposite tendencies exist in this process. In this study, it is aimed to understand how does IAC reach its targets which have been determined via two opposite tendencies. The reviews which will focus on IAC and YOIKK in Turkey consist the field of the research. Furthermore, the legislation which was introduced in the context of YOIKK will be analysed and the observations on the two opposite tendencies: competition and cooperation will also be integrated in to the study.