Nataliia Reznikova

  Volodymyr Panchenko

  Olena Bulatova


The purpose of the paper is to analyse the fundamental principles of the policy of economic nationalism and economic patriotism, its origins, intentions and mechanisms of implementation. The analysis of selected theories allowed for outlining the most essential characteristics, along with identifying the ones laying the fundament for economic nationalism. The main purposes of the policy of economic nationalism and economic patriotism have a similarity: in spite of the common adjective “economic”, they have always gone beyond the boundaries of economic regulation, being a response on “political order” of the time. 21 century offers a lot of evidence to confirm the above thesis. Elements of the economic nationalism in the economic patriotism policy have been demanded by state power officials as a kind of response on the awareness of market failure in striking a new balance in the conditions of the imbalanced global economy, with the growing competition and the shrinking global trade. Methodology. There is a need to reconsider the origins of economic nationalism by making an analysis of the concepts of nationalism, represented by four paradigms: modernism, primordialism, constructivism and perennialism. Results. Use of the term “economic patriotism”, contrary to “economic nationalism” or “neo-mercantilism”, gives vivid evidence of different sources for patriotic intervention in the economy. While the instruments of conservative economic patriotism include classical protectionist measures (in full conformity with the ideology of economic nationalism) aimed at domestic protection for further expansion, and the capacities of protective regionalism are used (when it is pursued by regional associations that have a supranational regulatory body), liberal economic patriotism is implemented by the use of neo-protectionism instruments that are not confined to regulation of foreign trade, but focused on stimulation of economic activities by the use of capacities of internal demand and stimuli to supranational industry (which should not be confused with the industrial sector). Practical implications. The analysis of the essential meaning of the concepts of “economic nationalism” and “economic patriotism” by many classification criteria enables to argue that these categories have a high potential of solidarity. The analysis gives grounds for practical conclusion that economic nationalism meant to form a powerful state that sets up economic priorities and pursues the respective economic policy. According to economic nationalism, the market cannot be self-regulated; moreover, because powerful economies “regulate” the global market for their own advantage, a national state needs to correct market relations. Value/originality. Therefore, economic nationalism can be understood not only in its essential meaning but in its political context as well. Independence as a political goal needs to be distinguished from self-sufficiency as a by-product of policy focused on other objectives. Thus, tariff protection for some industries, introduced to hide political intentions to cut high competitive imports from a country of their origin, will enhance the country’ independence in a direct way. But autarchy is not a direct goal of the tariff protection policy. We determined that liberal economic patriotism is a response to deformation of the classical credo of liberalism “laissez-faire”.

How to Cite

Reznikova, N., Panchenko, V., & Bulatova, O. (2018). THE POLICY OF ECONOMIC NATIONALISM: FROM ORIGINS TO NEW VARIATIONS OF ECONOMIC PATRIOTISM. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(4), 274-281.
Article views: 885 | PDF Downloads: 830



economic nationalism, economic patriotism, protectionism, neo-protectionism, economic policy


Abdelal, R. (2001). National Purpose in the World Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Bhagwati, J. (1988). Protectionism: The Ohlin Lectures. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Cohen, S. S. (1991). Crossing Frontiers: Explorations in International Political Economy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Cohen, S.S., Zysman, J. (1987). Manufacturing Matters: The Myth of the Post-Industrial Economy. New York: Basic Books.

Conversi, D. (2007). Homogenisation, nationalism and war: should we still read Ernest Gellner? Nations and Nationalism, 13(3), 371-563.

Clift, B., Woll, C. (2012). Economic patriotism: reinventing control over open markets. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(3), 307-323.

Crane, G. (1998). Economic Nationalism: Bringing the Nation Back In. Millennium, 27(1): 55-76.

Gellner, E. (2006). Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Gilpin, R. (1987). Political Economy of International Relation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gilpin, R. (2001). Global Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Greenfield, L. (2001). The Spirit of Capitalism: Nationalism and Economic Growth. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press.

Heilperin, M. (1980). Studies in Economic Nationalism – Geneva: Publications de L'Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales.

Henderson, W. (1983). Friedrich List: Economist and Visionary 1789-1846. London: Routledge.

Levi-Faur, D. (1997). Friedrich List and Political Economy of the Nation-State. Review of International Political Economy, 4(1), 154-178.

List, F. (1909). The National System of Political Economy. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Nairn, T. (1997). Faces of Nationalism. London and New York: Verso.

Reich, R. B. (1991). The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 2lst-Century Capitalism. New York: Knopf.