How Hegemonic Transitions Depend on State Type

* Article / Chapter: Transitions in Hegemony: A Theory Based on State Type and Technology. By Peter J. Hugill. Chapter of the book: Systemic Transitions pp 31–54; Palgrave-Macmillan,

URL = https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230618381_3

Part of the The Evolutionary Processes in World Politics series book series (EPWP)

Abstract

"A critical question for world-system theory is what level of predictability there is for hegemonic transitions in the world system. I argue here, on the basis of historical experience, that a proper theory of hegemonic transitions needs to account for several types of transition. At heart, the types of polities competing shape the transition through their internal struggle to control the levers of state power in the states they occupy. The two dominant state types that result from these struggles are trading states and territorial states. In the past 500 years or so of the operation of the modern world system it is noticeable that all of the major trading states have been, or have been trending toward, capitalist forms of economic and social organization. The territorial states have tended to be, or have been trending toward, more statist forms of economic and social organization.

At its simplest, two state types give us three basic types of transition:

• Type I between a trading and a territorial state;

• Type II between two trading states; and

• Type III between two territorial states."

Excerpt

Peter Hugill:

"At each transition there is a dominant power, the declining hegemon, and one or more challenger powers. Each state type, trading or territorial, and each subtype, hegemon or challenger, also tends to have a preferred economic strategy. In all types of transitions a complex set of boundary conditions operates to shape the struggles. Three types of struggle are most important: economic; politico-military; and geopolitical. Each type of struggle creates its own suite of strategies, all of which are mediated by available technology. Some, but not all these struggles, eventuate in war.

This chapter lays out the basics of the model and then applies it to the four transitions that we have so far experienced in the world system:

• Portugal to Holland;

• Holland to Britain I;

• Britain I to Britain II;

• and Britain II to America (Modelski 1978).

Of the five hegemonies thus far all have been trading states.

The first three, those of Portugal, Holland, and Britain I, operated in a commercial, Eotechnic form of world economy, trending toward capitalism (Mumford 1934; Hugill 1993).

The last two operated in a fully capitalist, industrial world economy, but under very different technological systems with very different energy sources. Britain II’s hegemony was based on the first industrial revolution and was transitional from an organic world economy to one based on hydrocarbons, in this case coal.

America’s hegemony has been based on the second industrial revolution and has been increasingly embedded in a world economy based on organic chemistry that has been heavily dependent on hydrocarbons, mainly oil and natural gas."