DOCSLIB.ORG

Macintyre & Naughton Remapping #4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Macintyre & Naughton Remapping #4 The Decline of a Japan-led Model of the East Asian Economy Andrew MacIntyre & Barry Naughton* Revised October 15, 2002 * We thank Peter Drysdale, Ross Garnaut, Stephan Haggard and T.J. Pempel for very helpful critiques of earlier drafts of this paper, and Pablo Pinto for research assistance. Andrew MacIntyre is Director of the Asia-Pacific School of Economics and Government at the Australian National University, and Barry Naughton is Professor in the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego. 1 The dynamism of the Asian economies since the 1950s not only implies rapid growth, it also implies continuous change in the economic relations among East Asian countries. In this paper we map the changing interests of three key East Asian countries with respect to the main economic issues, and explore the way in which those perceived interests shape what those countries have sought to achieve from regional economic cooperation. Specifically, we focus on the interaction between changes within national political economies and changes in the wider regional economy, and the effect these two variables have on had on government-to-government economic cooperation in Asia. Our aim is to describe and explain what we see as a basic shift in the pattern of economic and economic cooperation in East Asia. The established wisdom about both economic integration in East Asia and government-to-government economic cooperation has been informed by the wave of literature produced in the 1990s that sought to make sense of the remarkable developments in the region in the early part of that decade and the latter part of the preceding decade. In this paper we attempt to make sense of the many important changes at both the national and regional levels since that time, the consequences of which are now beginning to become more clearly apparent. To highlight these changes, we develop a simplifying framework in which East Asian economic interactions are divided into two periods: the first, from about 1985 to about 1994, we characterize as the period of the flying goose model and of “open regionalism”, or APEC-style consensual cooperation among governments. The second period, from about 1994 through the present, we characterize as a period of instability in economic hierarchies and economic relations. The new period reflects the emergence of competing inter-regional production complexes (Japan-centered vs. greater China). The result has been great difficulty in converging on patterns of regional cooperation that are seen to be mutually beneficial by the countries involved. We develop and illustrate this argument by focusing on the behavior of three Asian countries: Japan, China, and Indonesia. We use these countries not simply because they are the biggest. We use them because, together, they capture much of the essential dynamics of regional economic cooperation across East Asia. In broad terms, we can 2 think of Japan, followed by South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore as representing capital- and technology-rich political economies, which potentially form the nodes of high-level economic development. China represents the most important of the dynamic middle-tier economies whose rapid growth is disrupting traditional economic relationships.2 The cross-border production networks that link China and Taiwan, as well as Singapore and Malaysia, are creating dynamic economic regions that are closing the gap with Japan. Indonesia shares with Thailand, the Philippines, and Malaysia many characteristics as resource- and labor-rich political economies. During our first period from the mid-80s to the early-90s – the period of more hierarchical regional economic relations – the rough characterizations of economies in the previous paragraph captures much of the fundamental character of Asia’s political economy. Subsequently, however, as the hierarchical regional structure increasingly breaks down, this becomes a less satisfactory taxonomy. But this gets us to the heart of the paper: the changing dynamics of the Asian regional economy and the implications of this for attempts by national governments to build regional economic cooperation. The paper is organized in two main sections, corresponding to the two periods we seek to contrast. And then, for each period, we present five short sub-sections: the overall economic environment, country sections for Indonesia, China and Japan, and the implications for international cooperation. IA. The Economic Setting in the 1985-1994 Period The year 1985 marks a convenient starting point for the acceleration of integration in East Asia. The Plaza Accord of that year, and the currency realignments that followed in its wake, were key short-term drivers of change. Currency realignments crystallized the economic changes that had been building over the previous couple decades. By the early 1980s, the remarkable success of Japan had been followed by that of the “four small dragons” (Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore) in pursuing export oriented industrialization. The success of that development strategy created huge export 3 surpluses, which in turn created irresistible upward pressure on the currencies of Japan and some of the dragons. Thus, currency realignments were simultaneously consequences of an existing development outcomes, and causes of further changes in the economic strategy of other East Asian actors. In the short run, again, currency realignment made production in Japan, Korea and Taiwan much more costly, and encouraged firms in those countries to relocate production to less developed parts of Asia. But the receptivity of those other countries was greatly enhanced by three factors. First was the demonstration effect. Countries such as China and Indonesia saw the success of Taiwan and Korea first hand, and observed the development gap open up between them. The second exogenous factor influencing receptivity was the collapse in raw material prices that began in the early 1980s and culminated in the rapid decline in petroleum prices in 1986. This convinced oil exporters like Indonesia and China—but also agricultural material exporters such as Malaysia and Thailand—that there was no real future with commodity-based export development. Third, the success of the Japanese economy, combined with the appreciation of the Japanese currency, meant that Japanese capital and technology was available to the rest of Asia. We use the familiar “flying goose” label to describe this period. The key factors that make the label applicable are the following: 1: There was perceived to be a clear hierarchy of economic development in East Asia at this time. Japan was unambiguously the economic leader, in all respects. Korea and Taiwan were unambiguously second, with Singapore and Hong Kong close behind technologically, and bringing superior commercial resources. Malaysia and Thailand came next, and China and Indonesia followed. Potential entrants waited outside the door: Vietnam most importantly. 2: Japan was seen to be the key source of both capital and technology. Japanese investment came both through foreign direct investment [FDI] and through bank lending. Japanese technology made its FDI especially attractive. Japanese corporate networks 2 In addition, China shares with Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos characteristics of transitioning socialist regimes 4 would integrate firms in other East Asian economies, providing rapid institutional and managerial learning, in addition to “hard” technology transfer. 3: Significant aspects of the Japanese economic policy were seen to be not only successful, but also replicable. Protection of some domestic economic sectors was not seen to be an obstacle to export-driven growth. So long as selective trade promotion effectively targeted emerging export sectors—and stable macroeconomic policies provided a predictable, low inflation environment—countries could gradually emerge into the world economy without the political and economic disruption of across-the-board liberalization. Like any simple metaphor, the flying goose model falls short of a comprehensive description of the complex Asian reality. It papers over important differences among the various categories or cohorts of developing East Asian economies. For instance, there is important variance in terms of the significance of agriculture and extractive industries, the character of protectionism, the extent of openness to foreign investment, and the basic political economies of foreign economic policy (Bernard & Ravenhill, 1995; MacIntyre, 1994; Hill, 1993; Jomo, 1997). But our purpose is not to talk a out differing development models around the region. Further, the flying goose metaphor (and, indeed, the very notion of “an East Asian economy”) clearly does not come to grips with the glaring fact the United States was a critical part of the underlying economic equation. None of this is in dispute. To be clear, we invoke the flying geese image not to describe the model of economic development in any particular country or to characterize the totality of international economic relations across the greater Pacific, but to capture the perceived nature of economic relations among East Asian countries. For our purposes the utility of the model is that it captures the notion of an hierarchical pattern of economic development across Asia, in which it appeared national economies could interact without fundamental conflict of economic interests. Japan was the key driver and would stay on top, but the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Development of Japanese Industry and Business
    REC6075 Development of Japanese Industry and Business Fall 2014 PROFESSOR: Yoshitaka Okada CLASS ROOM: CLASS HOURS: 6:00 pm – 9:10 pm on Wednesdays OFFICE HOURS: after the class on Wednesdays COURSE DESCRIPTION: How did Japanese business practices and industry develop from the Meiji Restoration (1868) to the present? How did government industrial and technology policies, industrial structures, industrial relations, and production technologies influence the development of industry and business practices? What is happening with these issues presently in Japan? This course tries to answer these questions by tracing historical changes and also studying some cases, including Toyota and the Japanese semiconductor industry. Class lectures will be based on the theoretical framework of institutional economics and economic sociology. COURSE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Reading Assignments: None. Key reference in each section is * marked in this syllabus with PDF files provided in the IUJ computer system. 2. Take-home Mid-term Examination Due: Week 7 Please pick one topic out of (a) Industrial Organization, (b) Government-Business Relations, and (c) Sogo Shosha (General Trading Companies), and answer the following questions, not exceeding 15 pages (double-space). (1) Please trace the historical transformation of your selected topic from the Pre-WWII period to the present. (40 pt.) (To answer this question, you need to take a good note of my lectures.) (2) Identify both persistent and changing characteristics. (20 pt.) (3) How do you explain the persistence and change? (20 pt.) (4) How can the topic you covered be applied to your own country? (20 pt.) 3. Paper: One term paper of 15-20 pages is required.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1. Relationships Between Japanese Economy and Land
    Part I Developments in Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Administration that Underpin Japan’s Economic Growth ~ Strategic infrastructure management that brings about productivity revolution ~ Section 1 Japanese Economy and Its Surrounding Conditions I Relationships between Japanese Economy and Land, Chapter 1 Chapter 1 Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Administration Relationships between Japanese Economy and Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Administration and Tourism Transport Relationships between Japanese Economy and Land, Infrastructure, Chapter 1, Relationships between Japanese Economy and Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Administration, on the assumption of discussions described in chapter 2 and following sections, looks at the significance of the effects infrastructure development has on economic growth with awareness of severe circumstances surrounding the Japanese economy from the perspective of history and statistical data. Section 1, Japanese Economy and Its Surrounding Conditions, provides an overview of an increasingly declining population, especially that of a productive-age population, to become a super aging society with an estimated aging rate of close to 40% in 2050, and a severe fiscal position due to rapidly growing, long-term outstanding debts and other circumstances. Section 2, Economic Trends and Infrastructure Development, looks at how infrastructure has supported peoples’ lives and the economy of the time by exploring economic growth and the history of infrastructure development (Edo period and post-war economic growth period). In international comparisons of the level of public investment, we describe the need to consider Japan’s poor land and severe natural environment, provide an overview of the stock effect of the infrastructure, and examine its impact on the infrastructure, productivity, and economic growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Haggard Vita
    CURRICULUM VITA (May 2019) Stephan Haggard Lawrence and Sallye Krause Distinguished Professor Office Address: School of Global Policy and Strategy University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla CA 92093-0519 Phone: 858-534-5781 Fax: 858-534-3939 Home Address: 925 Archer St. San Diego CA 92109 858-488-3364 email: [email protected] Education B.A. (1976); M.A. (1977); and Ph.D. (1983) in political science, University of California, Berkeley. Military Service United States Army, 1972-74. Research , Teaching and Administrative Positions Assistant and Associate Professor, Department of Government, Harvard University, 1983-1991. Professor, Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies, University of California, San Diego, 1992- 2008. Distinguished Professor, Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies, University of California, San Diego, 2008-. Research Director, University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, 1996-1997 and 1999-2000. Director, University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, 1997-1999. Director, Korea-Pacific Program, Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies, University of California, San Diego, 1999-present Interim Dean, Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies, University of California, San Diego, 2000-2001. Associate Dean, School of Global Policy and Strategy, 2016-2018. Susan Strange Visiting Professor, London School of Economics, 2019. Books Pathways from the Periphery: The Politics of Growth in the Newly Industrializing Countries (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990); translated into Korean (1993) and Chinese (2009). with Robert Kaufman, The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995); translated into Chinese (2008). • Winner of the Luebbert Prize for best book in comparative politics, 1995 Developing Nations and the Politics of Global Integration (Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Japan and the Asian Economies: a "Miracle" in Transition
    TAKATOSHI ITO InternationalMonetary Fund Japan and the Asian Economies: A "Miracle" in Transition ONE EAST ASIAN country after another has taken off from a stagnant state to achieve an annual economic growth rate of 10 percent or more. The fact that such high economic growth rates are being sustained, along with observation based on growth convergence regressions that prior economic and social conditions do not seem to have warranted such rapid growth, has led many to call the East Asian growth a mira- cle. ' However, this is not the first time that an Asian country has grown miraculously fast. From the mid-1950s until 1973, Japan grew at a rate comparable to that of the East Asian economies today. And just as concerns are voiced today that some East Asian economies are over- heating and their governments face the difficult task of inducing a " soft- landing," a similar concern was heard in Japan three decades ago. Japan's high rate of growth from the mid-1950s through the early 1970s was a topic explored by many studies at the time. Several authors believed that Japan's economic institutions and policies were unique, and that its growth was an exception to the rule. In light of the rapid growth of the other East Asian economies in recent years, this earlier Japanese experience is no longer viewed as exceptional. The success of the East Asian economies offers fresh case studies for development economics and growth theory. The World Bank study The East Asian The views expressed are those of the author and should not be interpreted as repre- sentative of the staff or trustees of the Brookings Institution or the International Monetary Fund.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryan Kristopher Miller
    Bryan Kristopher Miller Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Department of Archaeology Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany Tel: +49 (0) 3641 686-742 [email protected] ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT Research Associate: Faculty of History, University of Oxford (Nomadic Empires Project) 2015-2019 Research Fellow: Gerda Henkel Foundation (Research Fellowship) 2014-2015 Postdoctoral Research Fellow: Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (at Bonn University) 2011-2014 Postdoctoral Research Fellow: American Center for Mongolian Studies/Henry Luce Foundation 2010-2011 Visiting Assistant Professor: Rowan University, History Department 2009-2010 Adjunct Professor: State University of New York – FIT, Art History Department Spring 2009 Teaching Assistant: University of Pennsylvania, East Asian Languages and Civilizations 2005-2006 Research Assistant: University of California, Los Angeles, Art History Department 1997-2000 Teaching Assistant: University of California, Los Angeles, Institute of Archaeology 2000 Teaching Assistant: University of California, Los Angeles, East Asian Studies Department 1998 Research Assistant: J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, Antiquities Department 1998-1999 ACADEMIC EDUCATION Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, East Asian Languages and Civilizations 2009 Dissertation: Power Politics in the Xiongnu Empire Committee: Paul Goldin, Nicola Di Cosmo, Bryan Hanks, Victor Mair; Nancy Steinhardt M.A., University of California, Los Angeles, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology 2000 Thesis: The Han Iron Industry: Historical Archaeology of Ancient Production Systems Committee: Lothar von Falkenhausen, David Schaberg, Charles Stanish Ex., National Chengchi University, Taiwan, Russian Language Department 2002-2004 Ex., Duke Study in China Program, Capital Normal University/Nanjing University 1996 B.A., Washington University in St. Louis, Archaeology & East Asian Studies (Dean’s List) 1997 ACADEMIC AFFILIATIONS Research Affiliate: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Model Innovation and Strategy at Mitsui and Co
    MITSUI & CO BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION AND STRATEGY AT MITSUI & CO. S/N 88-17-027 Mitsui & Co. – Business Model innovation and Strategy at Mitsui & Co. Introduction After successive years of profit, Mitsui & Co’s results in financial year Mar 2016 plunged to a net loss of about USD 834 million1. Its significance is compounded by the fact that it was the first loss ever recorded in recent decade of Mitsui. Is this a sign of more fluctuations of earnings to come, signaling that the general trading strategy traditionally held by Mitsui for decades is on the wrong footing with reality? “I take [this financial loss] very seriously,” said president and chief executive officer (CEO) Tatsuo Yasunaga in his maiden message in Mitsui’s 2016 annual report (Mitsui & Co, 2016, p. 8). Adding to this earning fluctuation concern, Mitsui’s 10-year share price has been flat. As illustrated in Figure A in Appendix A, including dividends and share splits, an investor putting money into Mitsui in 2007 would get a 10-year return-on-investment (ROI) of 8.6percent by 2017. From Appendix C, it is observed in the profit margin percentage chart that net profit margins throughout the 10-year period were around 3.5 percent to 7 percent, ignoring the loss in 2016. With profit margins at these relatively moderate to low levels, Mitsui’s revenue has to improve in order for the profits generated to be grown meaningfully. However, receipts remained relatively flat, with 2016’s end-of-year revenue being approximately the same as that of 2007 at about USD 48 billion.
    [Show full text]
  • New Political Economy of East Asia: Korean Perspective
    New Political Economy of East Asia: Korean Perspective Jaymin Lee (Yonsei University) [email protected] Abstract This paper first examines the effects of the rise of Chinese economy on Korean economic development and Korea’s policy to deal with them. The paper then investigates the Korean perception of the problem of emerging economic integration and political conflict in East Asia and Korea’s strategy to cope with the problem. Emphasis is given to comparative historical perspective. I. Introduction With the rise of the China, Korea faces two major (inter-related) challenges: • Finding new development strategy • Finding Korea’s Place in the international political economy II. China Shock and Korea’s Development Strategy Rise of China a mixed blessing for Korea economically. • China now the largest export market (21.8% in 2005, 27.2% if Hong Kong is added), far surpassing the US (14.5%). China the source of the largest trade surplus. • On the other hand, Chinese exports increasingly competing with Korean goods, and Chinese imports pushing up the price of raw materials in the global market. As a result, Korea’s terms of trade deteriorates, and that reduces the growth rate of national income, by as much as 1.4% points on average from 1996 to 2005 (GDP growth rate 4.5%, GNI growth rate 3.1%). • Korea also has to compete ever more intensively with China to induce investment (even by domestic firms), which is no longer confined to investment by smaller firms in labor intensive manufacturing industries. China by far the largest destination of Korean FDI overseas.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis on the Influential Factors of Japanese Economy
    E3S Web of Conferences 233, 01156 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202123301156 IAECST 2020 Analysis on the Influential Factors of Japanese Economy Tongye Wang1,a 1School of Economics, the University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2000, Australia ABSTRACT-Japan is known as a highly developed capitalist country. It was the third largest economy in the world by the end of 2017 and is one of the members of G7 and G20. Thus, for academic purpose, it is worth to discuss how Japan could expand the scale of its economy in different kinds of effective ways in the past half a century. This paper will talk about the main factors to influence the Japanese economy from post-war period to twenty- first century. The Solow-Swan model is used to target on explaining the factors that influence the long-run economic development in an economy. To present the effects that was brought by the past policies, both total GDP calculation and GDP per capita calculation are adopted as the evidence of economic success of Japan. industries further, and finally had achieved a huge success which brought Japan out of the previous stagnant situation. 1 INTRODUCTION For this post-war economic miracle, relevant studies had After 1945, the world economy tends to be integrated due figured out that the core of success is consisted with two to the demands of post-war reconciliation. In this situation, principal proposes: first, the successful economic reform the competitions and cooperation among countries on adopting Inclined Production Mode. The Inclined become more intensive as time goes by.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of East Asia Striving for Wealth and Power
    THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF EAST ASIA STRIVING FOR WEALTH AND POWER Ming Wan George Mason University 1 CQPRESS A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. Washington, D.C. CONTENTS Tables, Figures, and Maps xiii Preface xv PART I: INTRODUCTION 1. Introduction 1 What Is East Asia? 3 The Political Economy Approach 4 Defining Political Economy 5 Institutions 5 '• Comparative Political Economy and International Political Economy 9 The State and the Market 10 Economic Growth Versus Political Regime 11 Power of Ideas 11 Design of the Book 12 Suggested Readings 15 Notes 16 2. The East Asian National Systems of Political Economy 21 The Political Economy Systems of East Asia: An Overview 21 The Japanese System of Political Economy - 26 The Embedded Mercantilism 27 Structural Reform 28 The Political Economy Systems of the Asian Tigers 30 South Korea 30 Taiwan 32 Singapore 33 The Political Economy Systems of Southeast Asia 34 Malaysia 35 Thailand 37 Indonesia 38 The Philippines 39 Burma/Myanmar 41 viii Contents The Transitional Political Economies 43 China 43 Vietnam 46 North Korea 46 Cambodia 47 Conclusion 48 Suggested Readings 49 Notes ' 51 PART II: THE RISE AND FALL OF EAST ASIA 3. The Chinese World Order 59 World Orders 60 International Order 60 The Chinese World Order 61 Political Economy of East Asian Trade 65 Comparative Political Economy 70 China 70 Korea 73 Japan 74 Southeast Asia , 76 Beyond European Models of World History 78 Eurocentric Models of World History 78 New Scholarship on World History 79 Why Did the West Rise? 83 Conclusion 86 Suggested Readings 87 Notes 89 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Sanctions in Japan-Russia Economic Relations: Impact and Adaption
    Perspective & Analysis Focus Asia June 2019 Sanctions in Japan-Russia Economic Relations: Impact and Adaption In 2016, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe launched an eight-point economic plan to reform Japan’s relations with Russia. Abe’s aim was to foster economic interdependence between the two countries rather than allow a stalemate to continue on the longstanding dispute over the Kuril Islands. Dr. Shagina provides an analysis of the hitherto outcomes of Abe’s economic endeavors. n May 2016, the Shinzo Abe government launched economic relations. It aims to explore factors that an eight-point economic cooperation plan with impede progress on the eight-point economic Russia, which encompassed energy, infrastructure, cooperation plan, and asks to what extent U.S. Iagriculture and other sectors. By fostering strong sanctions constrain the scope of Japan-Russia economic economic ties, Prime Minister Abe hoped to soften deals. In addition, it examines the ways in which Russia’s stance on the disputed Kuril Islands (the Japanese businesses have adapted to the sanctions. Northern Territories in Japanese), a group of islands seized by the Soviet Union in 1945, following Japanese defeat in the Second World War. Since then, Maria Shagina is a JSPS Postdoctoral Research Fellow persistent distrust and tensions have paralyzed bilateral at Ritsumeikan University, Japan. Her main research relations, hindering prospects for a peace treaty. interests are sanctions and energy relations in post-Soviet countries. She was a visiting fellow at the Centre for Moving away from the stagnant territorial talks, Russian, European and Eurasian Studies, University of the proposed eight-point cooperation plan offered Birmingham and is currently affiliated with the Geneva a new approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Article (PDF)
    Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 128 International Scientific Conference "Far East Con" (ISCFEC 2020) Specific Features of Japanese Economy S N Sokolov1, E A Kuznetsova2, E A Rzhepka3 1Nizhnevartovsk State University, Nizhnevartovsk, Russia 2Nizhnevartovsk State University, Nizhnevartovsk, Russia 3Eastland Group of Companies, Irkutsk, Russia E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. The article covers the specifics of social and economic relations of Japan that is one of the leading world economies. The deficit of material and financial resources made Japan develop competitive export-oriented economy by using its main advantage, namely the highly qualified resources. The article proposes a trend equation that describes the national GDP. The economic development of Japan in the late XXth century demonstrates the success of the anti- crisis measures. Japan has been successful in its fight against deflation, but the demographic decrease interferes, which is a serious long-term problem for the economy. Asian countries and the USA are Japan's main trade partners. The article covers the fluctuations of geographic export and import zones in Japan in 2007-2017. Overcoming the economic crisis is relevant in terms of the study of anti-crisis strategy in Russia. 1. Introduction Global changes in the world resulting from political and economic reasons and fast scientific and technical progress require new approaches to the assessment of social and economic development of nations. It is well-known that Japan is one of the leading global powers and one of the largest economies in the world. The Japanese GDP based on purchasing power parity in 2018 was the fourth biggest in the world, with China coming the first after getting ahead of Japan since 2001, and India coming the third after leaving Japan behind in 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-War Development of the Japanese Economy
    PostPost--warwar DevelopmentDevelopment ofof thethe JapaneseJapanese EconomyEconomy ― Development, Japanese/Asian Style ― For Students in the EDP&M Program April 2007 Shigeru T. Otsubo* GSID, Nagoya University (w/ inputs from Prof. A.Furukawa, Ritsumeikan Univ.) For Students in the Economic Development Policy and Management Program Prof. Shigeru T. OTSUBO The purpose of this presentation is four-fold: 1) to introduce the macroeconomic development process of the postwar Japanese economy (the so-called “Miracle Recovery”); 2) to explore the Japan-specific (mostly microeconomic) elements of a market system that supported her rapid development; 3) to show the need for adjustments in the ‘Japanese-style market system’ in the post-catch-up era; and 4) to demonstrate the evolution and revolutions in economic systems underlying a development process. ____________________________________ * The presenter wishes to acknowledge: i) material inputs provided by Prof. Akira Furukawa, Ritsumeikan University, and ii) valuable comments provided by Ms. Debra J. Saito, Economist, Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 1 Objectives of This Presentation The purpose of this presentation is four-fold: 1) to introduce the macroeconomic development process of the postwar Japanese economy (the so-called “Miracle Recovery”); 2) to explore the Japan-specific (mostly microeconomic) elements of a market system that supported her rapid development; 3) to show the need for adjustments in the ‘Japanese-style market system’ of the post-catch-up era; and 4) to demonstrate the evolution and revolutions in economic systems underlying a development process. To start with, macroeconomic factors that supported Japan’s strong post-war economic recovery such as high investment ratios backed by savings mobilization, technology progress, flexible labor supply, and favorable external conditions will be reviewed.
    [Show full text]