| This dissertation is a political sociological analysis of the cross-border mobility of capital. It seeks to determine the political and economic conditions under which emerging economies embrace as well as curtail capital mobility, with a special emphasis on analyzing policies on "hot money" (i.e., volatile and liquid short-term capital flows). By drawing on 36 interviews with high-level policy-makers, as well as documentary evidence collected during a year of fieldwork, this study examines the different processes of financial opening in Chile, South Korea, and Turkey from the late 1970s onwards. It argues that policy-makers in emerging economies opt for rapid and comprehensive liberalization in cases where they lack disciplinary power over capitalists and where the state's infrastructural power is weak. In contrast, policy-makers curtail short-term finance capital and allow long-term capital only when they can discipline the consumption and investment demands of capitalists and the upper middle classes through an alliance with export sectors.;Despite the economic and social risks involved, financial opening has been a central aspect of neoliberalization in emerging economy countries. Moreover, there is significant variation across countries in terms of the degree of openness they adopt during their liberalization experience, as well as in terms of the social and economic consequences of their financial openings. This research aims to identify the differences in the state and political structures that account for such variation in the financial liberalization processes and outcomes. It advances a sociological understanding of the complex relations between global capital, domestic capital, economic sectors, social classes, and the state in a world where finance capital is free to move across national borders. In particular, through a comparative-historical examination of capital account liberalization reforms in Chile, South Korea, and Turkey, it articulates a theory of why state elites in emerging economies opt for embracing and rejecting capital mobility. |
