How does the Beijing Consensus differ from the Washington Consensus?

The Washington Consensus, coined in the 1980s, advocated for free-market policies such as deregulation, trade liberalization, and privatization. It was believed that by following these principles, countries could achieve economic growth and stability. The Washington Consensus was heavily influenced by Western economic institutions and focused on creating a uniform set of policies for nations to follow.

In contrast, the Beijing Consensus emerged as a response to the limitations of the Washington Consensus. The Beijing Consensus promotes state-led capitalism, gradual reform, and flexible economic policies that take into account local conditions. Rather than following a one-size-fits-all approach, the Beijing Consensus allows for variations in economic strategies based on each country's unique circumstances.

While the Washington Consensus emphasizes the role of the market in driving economic development, the Beijing Consensus sees a more active role for the state in guiding the economy. This includes strategic control over key sectors and a focus on maintaining stability and sovereignty, even at the expense of rapid liberalization.

Overall, the key principles of the Washington Consensus revolve around free-market capitalism and uniform economic policies, whereas the Beijing Consensus prioritizes state-led capitalism, flexibility, and pragmatism in economic decision-making.