This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by HAGGARD, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The East Asian NICs in Comparative Perspective

Purely economic analyses of the East Asian newly industrializing countries have overlooked the politics of their growth. Why were these countries able to pursue strategies that combined rapid growth with a relatively equitable distribution of income? The reason lies partly in external conditions, including expanding world trade, and, in the case of Taiwan and Korea, pressure from the United States for policy reform. Domestic social and political conditions were also auspicious, however. Export-led growth was facilitated by weak labor movements and the absence of leftist or populist parties. A relatively brief period of import-substitution policies prevented the development of strong protectionist business interests. Equity was advanced by land reforms in Korea and Taiwan and by the absence of a rural sector in Hong Kong and Singapore. No explanation is complete, however, without reference to the strength of the East Asian states, including their insulation from interest-group pressures and their cohesive, meritocratic bureaucracies. These political institutions facilitated coherent, decisive, yet flexible policy.

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 505, No. 1, 129-141 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/0002716289505001011


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. COTTON Understanding the State in South Korea: Bureaucratic-Authoritarian or State Autonomy Theory? Comparative Political Studies, January 1, 1992; 24(4): 512 - 531. [Abstract]