China as a “Quasi-Center” in the World Economic System: Developing a New “Center–Quasi-center–Semi-periphery–Periphery” Theory

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.1.0004
• Pages: 4-26
• Published date: 01 April 2021
• Date: 01 April 2021
• Author: Enfu Cheng,Chan Zhai
• Subject Matter: world economic system,center–periphery theory,quasi-center theory concerning China's economy

WRPE Produced and distributed by Pluto Journals www.plutojournals.com/wrpe/

CHINA AS A “QUASI-CENTER” IN THE WORLD

ECONOMIC SYSTEM

Developing a New “Center–Quasi-center–Semi-

periphery–Periphery” Theory

Enfu Cheng and Chan Zhai

Enfu Cheng is Chief Professor at the University of Chinese

Academy of Social Sciences, Academician of the Chinese

Academy of Social Sciences, Director of the Center of Economic

and Social Development at the Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences, and Editor-in-Chief of both International Critical

Thought and World Review of Political Economy. Email: wrpe@

cass.org.cn

Chan Zhai is Assistant Researcher at PLA Academy of Military

Sciences, Beijing, China. Email: zhaichanuk@gmail.com

Abstract: Based on the “center–periphery” and “center–semi-periphery–periphery”

theories, as well as on the analysis of data related to China’s GDP, foreign trade, finance,

foreign investment and aid, comprehensive competitiveness, the Belt and Road Initiative,

and so forth, this article explains that while a gap still exists between China and the

major countries at the center of the world economic system, China’s tremendous growth

obviously distinguishes it from the countries of the periphery or “semi-periphery.” If we

are to present an objective description and definition of China’s status and role in the

world economic system since 2012, we must therefore adopt the concept of a “quasi-

center.” This innovation supplements the dichotomy involved in the “center–periphery”

theory, and requires the formulation of a new theory with a three-tier structure of

“center–quasi-center–periphery,” or even a four-tier structure of “center–quasi-center–

semi-periphery–periphery.”

Keywords: world economic system; center–periphery theory; quasi-center theory

concerning China’s economy

1. Introduction

In the context of deepening economic globalization, China is gradually becoming

stronger and more prosperous. Its influence in the world economic system is

CHINA AS A “QUASI-CENTER” IN THE WORLD ECONOMIC SYSTEM 5

World revieW of Political economy vol. 12 no. 1 SPring 2021

growing exponentially, and in academia this has focused a great deal of attention

and discussion on the current status of China’s development and on future trends

within it. The main issues under discussion are the following: how should China’s

role or position in world economic development be defined and measured? How

should the country’s role and influence be evaluated? What are the challenges that

China faces in the world economic system? How can China engage in win–win

cooperation with other countries through the Belt and Road Initiative? In the lit-

erature of radical political economy, the “center–periphery” theory, which

expounds on the capitalist economic system and elaborates on the status of and

relations between different countries involved in the process of development, has

had a far-reaching impact as one of the perspectives for the analysis of world eco-

nomic systems. However, it is doubtful whether a theory first advanced by Raul

Prebisch in the 1940s and further elaborated by Andre Gunder Frank, Paul Baran,

Samir Amin, and Immanuel Wallerstein in the latter half of the last century can

fully explain China’s current development status. According to the “center–

periphery” theory, the center and the periphery exist in a solidified hierarchical

relationship, and the sudden rise within the capitalist world system of China as a

“peripheral country” and a socialist country is obviously unexpected. Even though

Wallerstein developed this theory into an analytical model with a three-tiered

“center–semi-periphery–periphery” structure, he failed to anticipate China’s cur-

rent development status. Although he acknowledged that semi-peripheral coun-

tries are potentially able to rise to the center or sink to the periphery, he claimed

further that the “catch-up” development model that aims to make semi-peripheral

countries part of the center should not be encouraged, and that the countries of

the periphery should seek to develop their economies through “de-linking” from the

world system (Wallerstein 1996). This argument could be refined in the sense that

if the large gap between the periphery and the center requires the countries of the

semi-periphery and periphery to accumulate strength and capital through eco-

nomic development and to prepare for resistance, these countries certainly cannot

avoid the “catch-up” mode of development as a springboard for increasing their

own per capita income. Consequently, this paper argues that the peripheral coun-

tries should vigorously develop their economies and achieve a high degree of

industrialization and modernization; gradually overcome their economic depend-

ency on the countries of the center; pursue scientific development that effectively

combines economic independence and international collaboration; and actively

promote just and rational governance of the world system.

This paper will first review and evaluate the “center–periphery” theory, argu-

ing that this analytical tool is insufficient to explain China’s current development

and therefore needs to be improved. Empirical research shows that China at its

current stage of development should be redefined as a “quasi-center,” that is, as a