The lessons of East and Southeast Asian’s industrialisation
Introduction
This paper seeks to discuss and analyse the lessons of East and Southeast Asian’s industrialisation. The importance of understanding the industrialisation lessons of East and Southeast Asian is because of the rapid growth that was achieved in the period of 40 years. These lessons are important for other developing countries who want to follow the path of East and Southeast Asian countries that successfully industrialised in the period of forty years. Obviously, there are lessons that need to be learned from the fast growing industrialisation of this region.
This paper has double purposes. First, it will discuss the industrialisation process of South Korea, Hong …show more content…
Ogujiuba et al., (2011) claim that ISI started with the labour-intensive manufactures and low-skill. In the East Asian countries, the ISI was used “to build up an industrial technological competence” (see Ogujiuba et al., 2011:8). Through this means during the ISI phase the NICs moved to manufacturing of technological products such as the computer machines. In the 1950s Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea began their industrial catch-up until the 1970s. The East Asian NICs shifted from importing manufactured goods to a local manufacturing (McMichael, 1996; Ogujiuba, 2011). The purpose of this shift was to reduce an independence from foreign exchange. For example, Ogujiuba et al., (2011) argue that the purpose of ISI was to promote local industries and to replace the foreign manufactured products. In other words, ISI did not promote infant local industries but if also protected them through the establishment of protectionist industrial policy (Ogujiuba et al., …show more content…
One of the important roles that government played in this period of industrialisation was to develop industrial policies. For example, in Taiwan government adopted industrial policy before South Korea adopted its industrial policy (Auty, 1997). The rapid industrialisation growth in South Korea was achieved through the cohesive-capitalist state led by Park Chung Hee (Kohli, 2004). While Singapore industrial growth was tightly controlled by the state during the industrialisation (Harris, 1987). This shows that government in the Southeast region did not just provide an environment for economic growth but also assisted the industries to grow (Johnson, 1982). The economy of South Korea responded positively to the economic policy formulated under Park leadership. The high savings rates were channelled into the fast growing industrialisation of South Korea (Kohli, 2004). The above arguments show that the industrial growth in Southeast Asia could have not been achieved without strong state and its intervention to the
Introduction
This paper seeks to discuss and analyse the lessons of East and Southeast Asian’s industrialisation. The importance of understanding the industrialisation lessons of East and Southeast Asian is because of the rapid growth that was achieved in the period of 40 years. These lessons are important for other developing countries who want to follow the path of East and Southeast Asian countries that successfully industrialised in the period of forty years. Obviously, there are lessons that need to be learned from the fast growing industrialisation of this region.
This paper has double purposes. First, it will discuss the industrialisation process of South Korea, Hong …show more content…
Ogujiuba et al., (2011) claim that ISI started with the labour-intensive manufactures and low-skill. In the East Asian countries, the ISI was used “to build up an industrial technological competence” (see Ogujiuba et al., 2011:8). Through this means during the ISI phase the NICs moved to manufacturing of technological products such as the computer machines. In the 1950s Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea began their industrial catch-up until the 1970s. The East Asian NICs shifted from importing manufactured goods to a local manufacturing (McMichael, 1996; Ogujiuba, 2011). The purpose of this shift was to reduce an independence from foreign exchange. For example, Ogujiuba et al., (2011) argue that the purpose of ISI was to promote local industries and to replace the foreign manufactured products. In other words, ISI did not promote infant local industries but if also protected them through the establishment of protectionist industrial policy (Ogujiuba et al., …show more content…
One of the important roles that government played in this period of industrialisation was to develop industrial policies. For example, in Taiwan government adopted industrial policy before South Korea adopted its industrial policy (Auty, 1997). The rapid industrialisation growth in South Korea was achieved through the cohesive-capitalist state led by Park Chung Hee (Kohli, 2004). While Singapore industrial growth was tightly controlled by the state during the industrialisation (Harris, 1987). This shows that government in the Southeast region did not just provide an environment for economic growth but also assisted the industries to grow (Johnson, 1982). The economy of South Korea responded positively to the economic policy formulated under Park leadership. The high savings rates were channelled into the fast growing industrialisation of South Korea (Kohli, 2004). The above arguments show that the industrial growth in Southeast Asia could have not been achieved without strong state and its intervention to the