Abstract
This chapter reviews the main arguments for and against industrial policies that promote national or European champions. The arguments may be organized in three groups: static (extracting monopoly rent abroad; protecting employment); political-economy; and dynamic ones (innovative champions; spillovers, clusters, and poles). From the perspective of global welfare, it is argued that these three types of arguments are bad, bad, and mostly bad, respectively. The beggar-thy-neighbor type arguments of the static models of imperfectly competitive markets are, in general, bad from a global perspective, because they are aimed at “stealing” rents from other countries. The political-economy type arguments in favor of champion-promoting policies tend to be bad from any perspective other than those of politicians (and the protected firms). The infant-industry type arguments of the dynamic models of innovation and growth may be interpreted as suggesting that policies that try to prop up national champions are “mostly bad.” There are exceptions, however, and situations can be identified where temporary or targeted champion-promoting policies can be beneficial.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.