Long Cycle Theory
= "cycles that take longer than a generation to complete". [1]
Contextual Quote
"The theory of long waves allows us to identify tentatively the period of the beginning of a new long wave. It can start, according to several researchers in the 2020s or 2030s. The formation of the new technological system will not happen until this wave starts; it will emerge during the sixth long cycle."
- Andrey Korotayev, Anton and Leonid Grinin [2]
Context
Please note that long cycles come in different forms:
- The long waves or 'long cycles' terminology is most often used for the Kondratieff Cycles, economic cycles that take about 50 years in their ascending and descending (or stagnation) phases.
- In contrast, there are Very Long Cycles such as the Hegemonic Cycle, the latter being a political cycle related to great power dynamics.
- There are also short cycles, shorter than a human generation. Joshua Goldstein mentions:
- "Business (or "trade" or "Juglar") cycles, about 5 years long
- "Kitchin" cycles, about 10 years long, thought to be based on depreciation of short-term capital investments.
- "Kuznets"cycles ("building cycles" or "long swings") about 20 years long, based on waves of migration and the associated construction booms." [3]
Description
Joshua Goldstein:
1.
"Long waves (or Kondratieff Cycles) are defined by alternating economic phases an expansion phase (for which I will often use the more convenient term upswing) and a stagnation phase (which I will often call the downswing). These economic phase periods are not uniform in length or quality. The transition point from an expansion phase to a stagnation phase is called a peak, and that from stagnation to expansion is a trough. The long wave, which repeats roughly every fifty years, is synchronous across national borders, indicating that the alternating phases area systemic-level phenomenon."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc01.pdf)
2.
"What is the basic idea of a long wave? There is no single answer to this different scholars have adopted different definitions but most would agree on a definition based on alternating phases of rapid expansion and stagnation in the world economy, taking about fifty years per cycle.2These phases have been synchronous across the major core countries and across different economic variables. The scope of long waves is a subject of divided opinion. They are variously claimed to exist in at least price series and at most a wide range of economic and social variables and to extend over at least the period from about 1790 to 19254and at most the longer period from around 1500 (or even earlier) to the present."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc02.pdf)
3. From the Wikipedia:
"Long Cycle Theory George Modelski, who presented his ideas in the book, Long Cycles in World Politics (1987), is the chief architect of long cycle theory. In a nutshell, long cycle theory describes the connection between war cycles, economic supremacy, and the political aspects of world leadership.
Long cycles, or long waves, offer interesting perspectives on global politics by permitting "the careful exploration of the ways in which world wars have recurred, and lead states such as Britain and the United States have succeeded each other in an orderly manner." The long cycle is a period of time lasting approximately 70 to 100 years. Modelski divides the long cycle into four phases. When periods of global war, which could last as much as one-fourth of the total long cycle, are factored in, the cycle can last from 87 to 122 years.
Many traditional theories of international relations, including the other approaches to hegemony, believe that the baseline nature of the international system is anarchy. Modelski's long cycle theory, however, states that war and other destabilizing events are a natural product of the long cycle and larger global system cycle. They are part of the living processes of the global polity and social order. Wars are "systemic decisions" that "punctuate the movement of the system at regular intervals." Because "world politics is not a random process of hit or miss, win or lose, depending on the luck of the draw or the brute strength of the contestants," anarchy simply doesn't play a role. After all, long cycles have provided, for the last five centuries, a means for the successive selection and operation of numerous world leaders.
Modelski used to believe that long cycles were a product of the modern period. He suggests that the five long cycles, which have taken place since about 1500, are each a part of a larger global system cycle, or the modern world system. Under the terms of long cycle theory, five hegemonic long cycles have taken place, each strongly correlating to economic Kondratieff Waves (or K-Waves). The first hegemon would have been Portugal during the 16th century, then the Netherlands during the 17th century. Next, Great Britain served twice, first during the 18th century, then during the 19th century. The United States has been serving as hegemon since the end of World War II."
Source: Wikipedia: Hegemonic stability theory
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_stability_theory)
Status
Joshua Goldstein:
1.
"The overall empirical evidence for long waves is still quite mixed, but surprising consensus is found on the dating of price phases. Drawing on the existing literature, I develop a consensual base dating scheme covering 1495-1975. The debate on long waves has proceeded in two rounds of activity, centered in the 1930s and 1970s–1980s respectively times of stagnation in the world economy. In the first round of the debate, four theoretical schools emerged in accounting for the causal dynamics of the long wave. These focused on capital investment, innovation, capitalist crises, and war, respectively, as the driving force of the long wave. In the second round of the debate, the "war" school withered away, but the other three schools (reflecting three world views) continue to define the contours of the debate today. No theory has gained broad acceptance, and no consensus has been reached on the central issues of the debate. Each research school continues in its own framework but understands only with difficulty what another research school has learned; this impedes the cumulation of knowledge in the long wave field."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc01.pdf)
2.
"The study of long waves has generated heated controversy, contradiction, and irresolution for over sixty years without making much progress in "cumulating knowledge." Knowledge cumulation implies an established body of knowledge in the field, the frontiers of which may be expanded by ongoing research. In the long wave field there is no such body of knowledge, and no consensus exists on the central issues: the existence of long waves, their scope, and their causal dynamics. Instead, isolated research traditions create "pockets" of theory that are accepted only within their own tradition."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc02.pdf)
History
Joshua Goldstein:
1.
The publication of Kondratieff's (pronounced and sometimes written "Kondratyev") seminal article, "The Long Waves in Economic Life," in English in 1935 (9 years after its German appearance) marked the high point of interest in the first round of the debate, about 50 years ago. ... The year 1790 is the starting date of Kondratieff's studies, which were explicitly limited to industrial times." [4]
2.
Four Theories: "The first round of the long wave debate was dominated by four theories, associated respectively with Nikolai Kondratieff, Leon Trotsky, Joseph Schumpeter, and a group of mostly European scholars.
..
Each of the three remaining schools was to form the seed of a research tradition over the subsequent decades, however. The three research schools growing out of the theories of Kondratieff, Trotsky, and Schumpeter, respectively, shape the lines of debate on long waves today. These three theories roughly reflect the three world views of chapter 1 (conservative, revolutionary, and liberal). The revolutionary world view is expressed in the "capitalist crisis theory" of Trotsky, which stresses qualitative change, stages of development, and indeterminacy of outcome. The liberal world view is represented in the "innovation theory" of Schumpeter and stresses evolutionary progress through human inventiveness. The conservative world view underlies Kondratieff's "capital investment theory," stressing quantitative change and repetition within a stable system structure." [5]
Typology
Four Theories
Joshua Goldstein:
"The first round of the long wave debate was dominated by four theories, associated respectively with Nikolai Kondratieff, Leon Trotsky, Joseph Schumpeter, and a group of mostly European scholars."
The four approaches may be summarized as follows:
1.The capital investment theory
" .. argues that long waves arise from the massive investment in, and depreciation of, such long-lived capital goods as railroads, canals, and factories. During an economic upswing, overinvestment in capital goods occurs; this causes a downswing in which excess capital is depreciated. The depreciation of capital on the downswing opens the way for a new period of massive investment, again overshooting as the upswing continues. Key variables are capital investment and production.
2.The innovation theory
.. argues that long waves arise from clusters of innovations at particular times and in particular economic sectors. These clusters of related innovations create a new "leading sector" of the economy that grows rapidly and drives a general economic upswing. While that upswing continues, radical innovations are discouraged since existing investments in existing technologies are bringing good returns. However, the initial innovations eventually bring diminishing returns, and the economy slows down and slides into a downswing. The downswing encourages innovations, but there is a time lag before these can be developed. Key variables are inventions and innovations, production, and employment.
3.The capitalist crisis theory
.. argues that long waves, defined by recurring major crises in capitalism, arise from the tendency of the rate of profit to decline. The recovery from such crises is not endogenous to the capitalist economy, but results from exogenous factors (such as imperial expansion, the discovery of new natural resources, or the suppression of labor movements) that intervene to restore favorable long-term conditions of accumulation.8The rate of profit increases, allowing a new upswing but the next crisis follows inevitably. Key variables are the profit rate, class struggle, and production.
4. The war theory
.. argues that the economic long wave results from, or is closely connected with, major wars. The effects of recurring major wars primarily inflationary effects act as periodic shocks to the world economy and create long waves. Key variables are prices and war incidence and size. A related group (monetarists) in the early decades of the debate developed a parallel theory in which gold production rather than war (or sometimes combined with war) affected prices. In both the war and gold versions, the economic long wave is mainly a monetary phenomenon. While these schools shape the main lines of the debate, hybrid theories combine them in interesting ways. The work of Gaston Imbert in the 1950s contains an interesting synthesis of war and innovation explanations. After the 1950s, the war school no longer played a role in the economic debate."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc02.pdf)
In conclusion
Joshua Goldstein:
"Each of the three remaining schools was to form the seed of a research tradition over the subsequent decades, however. The three research schools growing out of the theories of Kondratieff, Trotsky, and Schumpeter, respectively, shape the lines of debate on long waves today. These three theories roughly reflect the three world views of chapter 1 (conservative, revolutionary, and liberal). The revolutionary world view is expressed in the "capitalist crisis theory" of Trotsky, which stresses qualitative change, stages of development, and indeterminacy of outcome. The liberal world view is represented in the "innovation theory" of Schumpeter and stresses evolutionary progress through human inventiveness. The conservative world view underlies Kondratieff's "capital investment theory," stressing quantitative change and repetition within a stable system structure."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc02.pdf)
Discussion
From the Wikipedia:
1.
George Modelski, who presented his ideas in the book Long Cycles in World Politics (1987), is the chief architect of long cycle theory. Long cycle theory describes the connection between war cycles, economic supremacy, and the political aspects of world leadership.
Long cycles, or long waves, offer perspectives on global politics by permitting "the careful exploration of the ways in which world wars have recurred, and lead states such as Britain and the United States have succeeded each other in an orderly manner." Not to be confused with Simon Kuznets' idea of long-cycles, or long-swings, long cycles of global politics are patterns of past world politics.
The long cycle, according to Dr. Dan Cox, is a period of time lasting approximately 70 to 100 years. At the end of that period, "the title of most powerful nation in the world switches hands." Modelski divides the long cycle into four phases. When periods of global war, which could last as much as one-fourth of the total long cycle, are factored in, the cycle can last from 87 to 122 years.
Many traditional theories of international relations, including the other approaches to hegemony, believe that the baseline nature of the international system is anarchy.
Modelski's long cycle theory, however, states that war and other destabilizing events are a natural product of the long cycle and larger global system cycle. They are part of the living processes of the global polity and social order. Wars are "systemic decisions" that "punctuate the movement of the system at regular intervals." Because "world politics is not a random process of hit or miss, win or lose, depending on the luck of the draw or the brute strength of the contestants", anarchy does not play a role; long cycles have provided, for the last five centuries, a means for the successive selection and operation of numerous world leaders.
Modelski used to believe that long cycles were a product of the modern period. He suggests that the five long cycles, which have taken place since about 1500, are each a part of a larger global system cycle, or the modern world system.
Under the terms of long cycle theory, five hegemonic long cycles have taken place, each strongly correlating to economic Kondratieff Waves (or K-Waves). The first hegemon would have been Portugal during the 16th century, then the Netherlands during the 17th century. Next, Great Britain served twice, first during the 18th century, then during the 19th century. The United States has been serving as hegemon since the end of World War II.
In 1988, Joshua S Goldstein advanced the concept of the political midlife crisis in his book on "long cycle theory", Long Cycles: Prosperity and War in the Modern Age,which offers four examples of the process:
- The British Empire and the Crimean War (1853–1856): A century after Britain's successful launch of the Industrial Revolution, and following the subsequent British railway boom of 1815–1853, Britain, in the Crimean War, attacked the Russian Empire, which was perceived as a threat to British India and to eastern Mediterranean trade routes to India. The Crimean War highlighted the poor state of the British Army, which were then addressed, and Britain concentrated on colonial expansion and took no further part in European wars until the outbreak of World War I in 1914.
- The German Empire and World War I (1914–1918): Under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, Germany had been unified between 1864 and 1871, and then had seen 40 years' rapid industrial, military, and colonial expansion. In 1914 the Schlieffen Plan for conquering France in eight weeks was to have been followed by the subjugation of the Russian Empire, leaving Germany the master of Mitteleuropa (Central Europe). In the event, France, Britain, Russia, and the United States fought Germany to a standstill, to defeat, and to a humiliating peace settlement at Versailles (1919) and the establishment of Germany's unstable Weimar Republic (1919–33), in a prelude to World War II.
The Soviet Union and the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): The Soviet Union had industrialised rapidly under Joseph Stalin and, following World War II, had become a rival nuclear superpower to the United States. In 1962 Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, intent on securing strategic parity with the United States, covertly, with the support of Fidel Castro, shipped nuclear missiles to Castro's Cuba, 70 miles from the US state of Florida. US President John F. Kennedy blockaded (the term "quarantined" being used because a blockade is an act of war), the island of Cuba and negotiated the Soviet missiles' removal from Cuba (in exchange for the subsequent removal of US missiles from Turkey).
- The United States and the Vietnam War (1955–1975): During World War II and the ensuing postwar period, the United States had greatly expanded its military capacities and industries. After France, supported financially by the US, had been defeated in Vietnam in 1954 and that country had been temporarily split into North and South Vietnam under the 1954 Geneva Accords; and when war had broken out between the North and South following South Vietnam President Ngo Dinh Diem's refusal to permit all-Vietnam elections in 1956 as stipulated in the Geneva Accords, the ideologically anti-communist United States supported South Vietnam with materiel in a Cold War proxy war and by degrees allowed itself to be drawn into South Vietnam's losing struggle against communist North Vietnam and the Viet Cong acting in South Vietnam. Ultimately, following the defeat of South Vietnam and the United States, the US's governing belief that South Vietnam's defeat would result in all of remaining Mainland Southeast Asia "going communist" (as proclaimed by the US's "domino theory"), proved erroneous."
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory)
2.
"George Modelski, who presented his ideas in the book, Long Cycles in World Politics (1987), is the chief architect of long cycle theory. In a nutshell, long cycle theory describes the connection between war cycles, economic supremacy, and the political aspects of world leadership.
Long cycles, or long waves, offer interesting perspectives on global politics by permitting "the careful exploration of the ways in which world wars have recurred, and lead states such as Britain and the United States have succeeded each other in an orderly manner." The long cycle is a period of time lasting approximately 70 to 100 years. Modelski divides the long cycle into four phases. When periods of global war, which could last as much as one-fourth of the total long cycle, are factored in, the cycle can last from 87 to 122 years.
Many traditional theories of international relations, including the other approaches to hegemony, believe that the baseline nature of the international system is anarchy. Modelski's long cycle theory, however, states that war and other destabilizing events are a natural product of the long cycle and larger global system cycle. They are part of the living processes of the global polity and social order. Wars are "systemic decisions" that "punctuate the movement of the system at regular intervals." Because "world politics is not a random process of hit or miss, win or lose, depending on the luck of the draw or the brute strength of the contestants," anarchy simply doesn't play a role. After all, long cycles have provided, for the last five centuries, a means for the successive selection and operation of numerous world leaders.
Modelski used to believe that long cycles were a product of the modern period. He suggests that the five long cycles, which have taken place since about 1500, are each a part of a larger global system cycle, or the modern world system. Under the terms of long cycle theory, five hegemonic long cycles have taken place, each strongly correlating to economic Kondratieff Waves (or K-Waves). The first hegemon would have been Portugal during the 16th century, then the Netherlands during the 17th century. Next, Great Britain served twice, first during the 18th century, then during the 19th century. The United States has been serving as hegemon since the end of World War II."
Source: Wikipedia: Hegemonic Stability Theory [6]
Modelski’s World Leadership Cycle
"Modelski’s model is a historically based theory founded on his interest in naval history. Some key elements of his theory are:
- Power is a function of global reach (the ability to influence events across the globe).
- Historically, world power rested upon the ability to control the oceans (“ocean-going capacity”).
- Ocean-going capacity is measured by the combined tonnage of a country’s military and merchant navies.
- Power in this model is about strength and dominance.
A world leader is able to offer an “innovation” that provides geopolitical order and security.
An innovation refers to bundles of institutions, ideas and practices.
Cycles of world leadership are dynamic—they rise and fall.
Each cycle of world leadership is comprised of four phases (pg 199):
- Phase of global war
- Phase of world power
- Phase of delegitimation
- Phase of deconcentration "
The Political Interpretations of Cycles: Revolutionary, Liberal, and Conservative World Views
Joshua Goldstein:
"The existing literature on long cycles consists of disconnected fragments of theory and evidence, with no consensus on what a long cycle is, how to measure and identify it, or how to account for it theoretically. The book's first task is to make sense of these past studies, to compare them, and to account for differences and similarities among them. As an ordering principal for that review, I distinguish three world views revolutionary, liberal, and conservative that shape different perspectives, approaches, and epistemologies. They are the lenses through which people see the world and the frameworks within which theories of that world are built. The three world views shape the outlines of the major theoretical traditions in the long wave debate and in the war/hegemony debate. The different research schools rooted in each world view have different vocabularies, theoretical frameworks, methodologies, and results and communication among them is problematical. I will try to interpret between them without being wedded to one particular school or world view. The three world views are only approximate ideal types. They should be seen not as a rigid framework but as a tool for understanding the long cycle field and its development from a philosophy of science perspective. I will not try to give a definitive or full explanation of each world view. Theoretical and empirical work from six research schools (three on long waves and three on hegemony cycles) will be drawn on in an effort to find both agreements and differences between them. Despite the major differences among the theories of different research schools, many areas of convergence can be found.
Each of the three world views represents an angle from which this reality is seen conditioning the thematic questions asked, the types of data examined, the methodologies used, the theories postulated, and the conclusions drawn. The conservative approach centers thematically on the "preservation of the established order" and is "opposed to change or innovation."
- Conservative theories tend to portray the world as a relatively timeless and unchanging structure and hence see cycles as repetition — a regular repetition of the same rhythms over time. The liberal approach centers thematically on the evolution of the existing order. Continual progress, brought about through human innovation, leads to greater freedom (material and political) for the individual.
- Liberal theories portray cycles as upward spirals leading to higher stages of social evolution.
- The revolutionary approach centers thematically on the overthrow of the existing order and on its internal contradictions, which inevitably produce crises. Cycles are seen as dialectical movements the product of internal contradictions that drive the system in which they are found toward its own negation and transformation."
(http://www.joshuagoldstein.com/jgcyc01.pdf)
More information
Long Cycle theory is documented in the following book:
- Long Cycles: Prosperity and War in the Modern Age. By Joshua S Goldstein.