Introduction The fact that the over recent decades has seen a reduction in transaction costs and an increase in flows of goods, services, people and capital, is well established. (1) There is much less agreement, however, about the extent to which deeper economic integration, including increased gains from trade and investment, has brought change to institutional and value systems. At the present time this issue seems especially significant, as a region that had only a few years ago been celebrating its economic and social triumphs now confronts a widespread terrorist movement that invokes aspirations formulated some fourteen centuries ago. Perceptions of the Crisis--grounded in deep-running national aspirations and anxieties--differed from one country to another. A particular contrast, however, exists between United States and Australian experience of the Crisis, on the one hand, and most Asian interpretations on the other. Two longer-term developments seem to have been influenced by perceptions of the Crisis: the first concerns the future prospects of Asian vis-a-vis Asia-Pacific regionalism; and the second is the issue of whether globalization is likely to be potent as a concept extending beyond economic change and envisaging the evolution of a world society. The Crisis The Financial Crisis marked the end of an extraordinary decade of internationally-oriented economic growth throughout developing East Asia. Most developing economies in the region doubled output in the decade to 1996. Growth was steady, and there was growing confidence that it would be sustained over a long period. Sustained growth supported trade and investment liberalization in all East Asian economies. The liberalization proceeded most rapidly in some of the economies that had been most closed to international trade, including China, Indonesia and the Philippines. In each East Asian state trade liberalization and economic growth supported rapid expansion of imports, further improving the environment for the expansion of exports and output through East Asia. These beneficent processes came to a halt in one after another East Asian economy through the Financial Crisis. The shock came first to Thailand, in July 1997, and over the next six months had a major impact throughout peninsular and island Southeast Asia. Through the first half of 1998 it generated deep recession in Korea and Hong Kong. The collapse of output in Thailand, Malaysia and Korea, and most of all Indonesia, was not only large in comparison with the prosperity of the previous decade. It was large by the standards of economic crises in other regions and other times. The reduction in output in Indonesia was greater than in Western Europe during the Great Depression of the 1930s. An economic catastrophe of this dimension inevitably has substantial effects on how political communities view economic reality, and through changes in such perceptions, on ideas about economic policy. The deep economic depression centred in Victoria in Australia in the 1890s, for instance, played a major role in shaping the economic policies of the Australian Federation in the early decades of the twentieth century. The approaches to trade protection and intervention in the labour market that were established in the wake of the 1890s Depression cast a shadow right through the twentieth century. The Great Depression of the 1930s in the United States marked the beginning of a liberal supremacy surviving into the 1980s and to some extent today, in which government expenditure on social welfare and intervention in market processes became much more prominent. In Western Europe, the stresses of the 1930s Depression laid the ideological groundwork for the welfare state in the United Kingdom and for Nazism in Germany. At the time of the Asian Crisis, Ross Garnaut commented that the largest long-term economic effects of the Crisis would be through its effects on ideas about policy. …
Read full abstract