동아시아 經濟發展과 政府의 形態

The Economic Development and the Types of State in East Asia

The conventional neoclassical view is that state’s intervention as a strategy of development has been unsuccessful in the postwar period. This has led theorists to emphasize the important role of free market in the development process. But this view conflicts with much of the European historical experience. Almost all of the industrial nations of Europe used government-inspired and administered infant industry policies to launch successful industrial transformations. In addition, much of the recent literature on the economic success of East Asia points to the important role of the state in utilizing import substitution combined with export promotion in achieving rapid industrialization. How are this contrasting views to be made compatible? Why has state’s intervention been so effective in East Asia. The key distinction between failure and success in economic development is not the policies the government undertakers but the types of state. The development of the developing strong states which promote economic growth depends on the existence of institution that make it in the interests of political officials to abide by limits on their power. The state should be not only strong enough to establish and maintain property rights, but is a constitutionally prevented from violating these right. A state’s commitment to market-led growth requires the design of appropriate government institutions that ensure clear boundaries between the private and public, and that protect both property rights and agreements with business sector. The assurances that such boundaries are in place will expand the investment horizons of investors so that sustained long-term growth begin.