East Asian Developmental State Research Articles

The Politically Engaged Society, the State, Policy, ComparisonGordon White's Contributions to China Studies

Summaries Gordon White's contributions to the study of China fall under at least four major rubrics. Most important was his analysis of political engagement by a breathtaking range of social classes and groups in both the Maoist and Dengist periods. Second, he appreciated the role of the state analytically in shaping society's political engagement, and normatively because he thought it had essential social and economic responsibilities. Third, he hoped to influence policy indirectly, by providing cautionaries for policy‐makers and by writing for and collaborating with social scientists in other countries, especially China. Fourth, he placed China squarely in comparative contexts, first of revolutionary socialist states, and then of East Asian developmental states.

East Asian Growth before and after the Crisis

The paper surveys the literature on the growth performance of the East Asian economies, evaluates the sustainability of that performance, and provides a preliminary assessment of their long-term growth prospects in the aftermath of the current crisis. It highlights special features of East Asian growth, including unusually high factor accumulation and a favorable demographic transition, but argues that total factor productivity growth has generally been somewhat disappointing. It argues that there are downside risks to the East Asian developmental state model, and that it may become less attractive as these economies mature. Copyright 1999, International Monetary Fund

The institutional mediation of globalization: reconceptualizing the role of the state in the post-developmental state era

The article examines the role of the state in development, using the East Asian developmental states as exemplars. It analyses the conditions that gave rise to embedded autonomy in the East Asian developmental states as a way of understanding their institutional prerequisites. It is argued that not only has globalisation changed the context for the role of the state in the NICs but also it has made it increasingly difficult to replicate the NICs experiences. The current global conjuncture requires a new state form, a democratic facilitative state that establishes synergistic relations with society in the process of co-production. Countries that wish to successfully engage with the globalisation process would have to limit the state's role to interstitial intervention. At the same time, the state has to democratise and ensure the participation of business, labour and communities in the policy process.

China, Korea and Taiwan (review)

520 China Review International: Vol. 4, No. 2, Fall 1997 economie stagnation or decline (p. 146). To the East Asian developmental states, however, "getting prices wrong" (to quote Alice Amsden)' in the form of concessionary loans and protectionist multitiered exchange rates has been part and parcel of the development experience. A transition in China, Vietnam, and elsewhere is occurring, but, to use Chalmers Johnson's categorization, these transitions will more likely be from "plan ideological" economies to "plan rational" economies, not the "market rational" ones for which the World Bank and Mr. Pomfret continue to hope.2 Karl Fields University of Puget Sound Karl Fields is an associate professor ofpolitics and government specializing in East Asian political economy. NOTES1 . Alice Amsden, Asia's Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). 2. Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982). John Ravenhill, editor. China, Korea and Taiwan. 2 volumes. Brookfield, Vermont: Edward Elgar, 1995. 1,280 pp. Hardcover $379.95, isbn 1-85898-253-7. This two-volume set is part of a larger six-volume series, The Political Economy of EastAsia, edited by John Ravenhill. Two volumes on Japan and two volumes on Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand round out the series. The aim of the six volumes is to bring "together the best work published on the political economy of the East Asia region." Radier than attempt, in just nine hundred words, to cover all forty-five essays in this two-volume set, this review will concentrate on the fifteen selected by die editor to cover China and Hong Kong. Almost all of the essays here were published between 1986 and 1992 and represent scholarly efforts to understand the reform process unfolding in China since 1978. The selection is excellent, albeit heavily tilted toward writings on "political , . . economy" by political scientists rather than economists. Many of the essays are ofHawai'i Presstrue classics because the authors were among the first to identify and clarify important phenomena in the reform process. Yet from today's vantage point, most of these also seem curiously incomplete. Many present only fragmentary data to Reviews 521 support the identification oftrends and institutional changes. This has not stopped die authors from confidendy developing theories to explain the loosely identified phenomena they have identified. Typically the explanations presented are persuasive and well documented, but rarely are they compared with alternatives and are usually presented as solutions to a complicated puzzle pieced together by a hardworking area specialist. The result is that a careful reading ofthe fifteen essays here provides die reader with numerous insights into the political economy of China and a long research agenda of unanswered questions. Jonathan Unger's "The Decollectivization ofthe Chinese Countryside: A Survey ofTwenty-eight Villages" provides an excellent illustration of this point. Unger focuses on how the da bao gan (big management contracting) system of agricultural cultivation swept through rural China between 1979 and 1982. The picture painted in the Chinese press was that villages could choose among fifteen different types ofresponsibility systems. The reality was that most villages waited for instructions from upper-level officials concerning the choice of system, and that officials competed to see how rapidly they could implement it. Yet we also learn that two villages in Unger's sample were in fact allowed to choose among different systems. Lands in most villages were allocated by rules specified by the county bureaucracy, but the rules of division varied across counties. In two villages, village-level cadres were allowed to allocate lands. In a third village, fields were let out to the highest bidders. Methods also varied for allocating production tools and animal stock; some were sold, some were given away, and some were leased. Unger's essay offered essential insights into the Chinese reform process when it was first published in 1985/1986, but from today's vantage point several questions arise. First, can we draw many conclusions from a sample oftwenty-eight villages? The history ofthe land-reform process of1979-1982 should be sufficiently important to motivate an expanded study diat includes a larger sample of villages and their most important characteristics. Multivariate...

The limits of economic globalization in East Asian developmental states

In an attempt to adjust to economic globalization or internationalization, East Asian developmental states have liberalized their domestic economic systems, accelerating the introduction of the free‐market ideology. Despite their plan to establish the internationally compatible open‐market economy, however, the extent to which they can advance economic liberalization is limited. Political and economic burdens that the developmental state's extensive intervention in the market has incurred in the course of state‐led mercantile economic development, make it impossible for those states to execute full‐scale economic liberalization. The South Korean case clearly shows this. The Korean developmental state retains two major economic burdens: the exclusive ownership and the poor financial structure of the chaebôl. Insofar as Korean big business preserves those weak spots, the government cannot surrender the power of regulation despite its spontaneous implementation of the economic liberalization policy. In addition, the common ‘egoistic’ interests which government bureaucrats and the political class share also limit the degree to which economic liberalization policy can be implemented. The degree of state intervention in the market in Korea has been deeper than that in Japan which pioneered Asian developmental statism, and, thus, the political and economic burdens it has incurred for itself are heavier. Consequently, the East Asian developmental state cannot entirely withdraw its intervention in the market. The ‘support’ of industries is likely to diminish, but ‘regulation’ for the formation of the autonomous market will increase. For the Korean developmental state, globalization and economic liberalization are political economic slogans to re‐launch economic growth and to elevate the international economic competitiveness of industries under the initiative of the state, and motivated by nationalistic reasons. Hence, the role of the state in the market is still far from becoming redundant even in the tide of globalization and economic liberalization in the case of South Korea, where the legacy of strong developmental statism remains considerable.

The State and Taiwan's Mainland Economic Policy

T his article adopts the state-centered approach to analyze Taiwan's crossstraits economic policy in the 1990s. I use the strong-state paradigm to explain Taiwan's development in the past forty years. While the neo-liberal school of political economy stresses the advantage of laissez-faire policies, and dependency theorists emphasize international constraints upon development, the statist approach focuses on the state's capacity and autonomy in manipulating the statesociety relationship and in governing the market. The East Asian developmental states in general and Taiwan in particular work with and often promote the market, which is employed as an instrument that exposes particular industries to international competitive pressures. A selective industrial policy for economic development involves (1) state initiatives that decide which products or technologies should be encouraged; (2) public resources or influences over private resources to carry through these initiatives, and (3) a big before-the-fact strategy.' The state's regulative policies compete with the market mechanism in the international arena. The state must meet the major challenges presented by profit-seeking businessmen and economic interdependence among trading states. It needs to accommodate domestic social forces on the issue of trade and investment and to protect national interests through deliberate designs to enhance its competitive edge and increase international cooperation. The strong state initiates policies according to autonomous actions of the state elite, leads the market force, and adjusts the economic structure to accommodate the changing international environment. This article will highlight one crucial perspective of the state-centered

`Special Things in Special Ways': National Economic Identity and China's Special Economic Zones

Previous articleNext article No Access`Special Things in Special Ways': National Economic Identity and China's Special Economic ZonesGeorge T. CraneGeorge T. Crane Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 32Jul., 1994 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/2949828 Views: 16Total views on this site Citations: 12Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs (1979-1995), which is continued by The China Journal (1995-present). Copyright Australian Journal of Chinese AffairsPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:William J. Norris China's Post-Cold War Economic Statecraft: A Periodization, Journal of Current Chinese Affairs 50, no.33 (Jan 2022): 294–316.https://doi.org/10.1177/18681026211058186Cinzia Losavio China’s Internal Migrants: Processes of Categorisation and Analytical Issues, China Perspectives 2021, no.22 (Jun 2021): 49–60.https://doi.org/10.4000/chinaperspectives.11750Erik Post, Filipe Calvão Mythical Islands of Value: Free Ports, Offshore Capitalism, and Art Capital, Arts 9, no.44 (Sep 2020): 100.https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9040100Young-Chan Kim Assessing the Role of Local Governments in Line with the ‘Special Economic Zones’ Agenda: Case on Shenzhen in Guangdong and Kandla Export Processing Zone in Gujarat, India, (May 2020): 139–156.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44425-9_8Darcy Allen, Aaron M. Lane Cryptodemocratic Governance of Special Economic Zones, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2019).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3491481Madeleine Martinek China’s Experimentalist Approach to Reform, (May 2018): 57–120.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77616-3_3Jiaxiang Hu A Retrospective View on the First Three Years of China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone, The Chinese Economy 50, no.44 (Jul 2017): 225–237.https://doi.org/10.1080/10971475.2017.1321458Jinn-yuh Hsu State transformation and the evolution of economic nationalism in the East Asian developmental state: the Taiwanese semiconductor industry as case study, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 42, no.22 (Jan 2017): 166–178.https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12165LOTTA MOBERG The political economy of special economic zones, Journal of Institutional Economics 11, no.11 (Jun 2014): 167–190.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137414000241JONATHAN BACH “THEY COME IN PEASANTS AND LEAVE CITIZENS”: Urban Villages and the Making of Shenzhen, China, Cultural Anthropology 25, no.33 (Jul 2010): 421–458.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01066.xEric Florence Migrant Workers in the Pearl River Delta: Discourse and Narratives about Work as Sites of Struggle, Critical Asian Studies 39, no.11 (Mar 2007): 121–150.https://doi.org/10.1080/14672710601171756Marco Bellandi, Marco R. Di Tommaso The case of specialized towns in Guangdong, China, European Planning Studies 13, no.55 (Jan 2007): 707–729.https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500139244

The Strategic Dimension of the “East Asian Developmental States”

This article examines common strategic factors associated with the dynamic economic development of five Asian countries, namely, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. Despite some obvious differences, these five countries have enough in common that they can be classified as the East Asian developmental states'. The enquiry

Predatory, developmental, and other apparatuses: A comparative political economy perspective on the Third World state

Disappointment over the contributions of Third World state apparatuses to industrial transformation and the increasing intellectual dominance of “neoutiliarian” paradigms in the social science has made if fashionable to castigate the Third World state as “predatory” and “rent seeking.” This paper argues for a more differentiated view, one that connects differences in performance to differences in state structure. The “incoherent absolutist domination” of the “klepto-patrimonial” Zairian state are contrasted to the “embedded autonomy” of the East Asian developmental state. Then the internal structure and external ties of an intermediate state — Brazil — are analyzed in relation to both polar types. The comparative evidence suggests that the efficacy of the developmental state depends on a meritocratic bureaucracy with a strong sense of corporate identity and a dense set of institutionalized links to private elites.