Abstract
This note first identifies new elements in the conceptual framework employed in The East Asian Miracle (EAM) by comparing it with the market-friendly approach propounded in WDR 1991. It then examines the evidence and reasoning on the basis of which EAM comes out reaffirming the World Bank's official position that emphasizes policy fundamentals and opposes industrial policy. Main conclusions are: (a) EAM's claim that selective intervention has not significantly affected sectoral growth patterns is not well substantiated; and (b) the report's conclusion that sectoral composition did not affect the overall rate of productivity growth, although technically correct, is only as good as the underlying assumptions. Remarks on possible alternative ways of conceptualizing the development process conclude the note.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
