Comparative Political Economic Analysis of Automotive Industrial Policies in Malaysia and Thailand
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
60 State and Industrial Policy State and Industrial Policy: Comparative Political Economic Analysis of Automotive Industrial Policies in Malaysia and Thailand Wan-Ping Tai Cheng Shiu University, Taiwan Samuel C. Y. Ku National Sun Yat-Sen University, Taiwan Abstract Numerous differences exist between the neoclassical and national development schools of economics on how an economy should develop. For example, should the state interfere in the market using state resources, and cultivate certain industries to achieve specific developmental goals? Although the automotive industries in both Thailand and Malaysia developed in the 1970s with considerable government involvement, they have evolved along very different lines. Can these differences be traced to different interactions between the state and industry in these two countries? This paper examines this issue and finds that although industries in developing countries need government assistance, the specific political and economic contexts of each country affect the policies adopted and their effectiveness. The choice between “autonomous development” (Malaysia) and “dependent development” (Thailand) is the first issue. The second issue is that politics in Malaysia has deterred the automotive industry from adopting a “market following” position. This paper finds that the choice of strategy and political interference are the two main reasons the automotive industry in Malaysia is less competitive than that in Thailand. Keywords: Automotive Industry, Developmental State, Malaysia Automotive Industry, Thai Automotive Industry, PROTON, Political Economic Analysis Introduction sectors and industries as diverse as iron, oil, manufacturing, sales, the stock market, In the wake of the 2008 economic crash, credit, and insurance. Because of the huge whether the U.S. government should knock-on effects that a collapse of this financially support the domestic automotive industry might have on the wider economy, industry has become a matter of debate. The the possibility of government intervention automotive industry has been one of the in the U.S. automotive industry remains an three main industries in the U.S. for the past option (Yun-Han Chu, 2008: 20). hundred years, and is involved in other Journal of ASEAN Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2013), pp. 55–82 © 2013 by CBDS Bina Nusantara University and Indonesian Association for International Relations ISSN 2338-1361 print / ISSN 2338-1353 electronic 56 State and Industrial Policy This debate has touched on issues car sector (Rasiah, 1999). However, despite related to developmental economics such sharing a number of similarities in their as, when a new industry is launched or developmental backgrounds and with faces crises, should the state intervene and governmental organizations taking a help the industry, or should they follow the leading role in the industry, they have also selective policy to help only certain firms? diverged and chosen relatively different In what type of situation should paths to further development. Malaysia has governments intervene? Will state resources adopted its automotive industry as a devoted to the industry be used efficiently national industry, with an “independent to reach the development goal? These topics development” strategy applied to establish have been the focus of debates that have a national brand, whereas Thailand has never reached a consensus. chosen to cooperate with international car Most scholars of developmental manufacturers and adopted the “dependent economics feel that because of lacking development” strategy, which has made its market mechanisms and limited resources domestic automotive industry part of the in developing nations, policy intervention worldwide supply chain. The results of in industry is necessary to accelerate these two strategies show that the industrialization. However, although “independent development” of Malaysia industries in developing countries need has yielded fewer benefits (Fuangkajonsak, state intervention, not all such interventions 2006: 1-3). yield expected results. Could such Examining the development of the supported industries survive when the automotive industry with the development government withdraws its protection? What of politics and economics in countries can are the costs and benefits for the obtain a clearer picture of the relationship government under these policy between the state and industrial interventions? How can international development. This article does not focus on pressure to remove such protection be the theoretical study of specific issues handled? To protect vested interests, related to developing countries, but manufacturers might use non-financial analyzes how different historical systems resources to raise barriers to entry, thus result in different strategic choices and weakening their own market developmental effects by integrating competitiveness, which lead to poor results international and domestic political and in the long term. All of these issues are economic factors ( Abbott, 2003). Although important for studies of economic policies industrial development in developing adopted in developing countries (Wan-Wen countries relies on government Chu, 2001: 67). intervention, the economic and political Differing from the diverse studies of background of each country affects their East Asian countries such as Taiwan, Japan, selection of specific strategies: namely, the and South Korea, on official organization strategic choice between the “independent and industry development, relevant issues development” of Malaysia and the between the state and industrial policies in “dependent development” of Thailand; Southeast Asian countries are seldom then the “politicality” of the automotive focused. This study discusses the policies industry in Malaysia intervened with the for the automotive industry in Malaysia and “follow-the-market” policy. The results of Thailand because both of these developing “strategic selection” and “political countries have been eager to upgrade their intervention” are the two main reasons this domestic industrial base by developing the article concludes that the development of Journal of ASEAN Studies 57 the automotive industry in Malaysia has developing countries, particularly East been inferior to that in Thailand. Asian countries, should ascribe to governments remaining neutral, and they also criticize the World Bank report for Theoretical Study: The state, industrial neglecting the importance of the state in development, and automotive industry industrial development. policies. These scholars offer an extremely different explanation from neoclassical The State and Industrial Development economics (Jomo, 1994): 461-508). For Scholars typically discuss the example, Johnson introduced a concept of developmental patterns of a national “developing-type country” for Japanese industry from two perspectives. Under a industrial research in 1982, which stated good economic environment, scholars that industrialization in the so-called New following neo-classical economics believe Nations is related to the great promotion of that industry grows spontaneously with a economic development by the state comparative advantage. In their view, (Johnson, 1982; Shumpei Kumon and Henry competition should be free and open at the Rosovsky, 1972: 109-141). Taking South start of an industry to allow private Korea as an example, Hasan claimed that its investors to allot resources based on successful economy was based on economic rationality because this is best government intervention. Hasan also stated, able to raise competitiveness (Balassa, 1988: “The economy in South Korea relies on the 27-57; Bhagwati, 1988: 27-57). Scholars of operation of private enterprises that are in liberalism accept this view (Kruegert, 1993). fact directed by the central government. The The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and state not only establishes policies and rules, Public Policy, published in 1993 by the but also dominates the economy by World Bank, is a typical work from this controlling market mechanisms, and thus school (Stiglitz and Shahid, 1994). Its main has a critical impact on all entrepreneurial conclusion was that giving up market price decisions (Hasan, 1976). control is essential when hoping to develop Those scholars who support industrial competitiveness in transforming “Developmental State Theory” think that agriculture in developing countries. industrial development in developing However, scholars from the school of countries relies on intervention and development economics have raised protection from the state. This authorizes numerous doubts of the neoclassical the government to control the production, approach (Fishlow, 1994; Lindauder, 1994: allotment, and price of goods to reach the 12). Some make a case for the so-called best arrangement of resources (Kuckiki, “Dependency Theory,” which proposes that 2007: 3-6). They believe that despite international factors, particularly the liberalism aiding industrialization, the lack political and economic power from of a market mechanism might lead to an hegemonic countries, such as the United environment that increases the risk to States, play an active economic role in industry and adversely influence developing countries. This type of production. With insufficient private development is known as “invited investment and limited resources, selective development.” Other scholars state that government intervention becomes economic progress is not mainly caused by necessary for rapid