The Newly Industrializing Economies Of Asia

Where development is concerned, our language and perhaps our way of thinking often ap pear somewhat distorted. If anything, the Asian economies with their most impressive and dynamic growth should logically be called developing countries. Instead, we call them threshold countries, newly industrializing countries (NICs) or newly industrializing eco nomies (NIEs), the latter term taking into account the Chinese argument that Hong Kong and Taiwan should not be considered countries. During the eighties, when Latin American NICs became the main victims of the debt crisis, the NIEs of East Asia (EANIEs), the little tigers or dragons, presented most impres sive examples of growth through orientation to world trade, fitting well into the Japanese 'flying-geese' concept. Naturally, questions were raised as to the reasons for this success, the lessons other countries could draw from it, and the outlook for the future. At the same time, the establis hed industrial countries wanted to know what NIE competition might mean for them. In 1988, the OECD published a study entitled "The NIEs -Challenge and Opportunity for OECD Industries". The NIBs had become a fashionable object of research and debate. In Western Europe, where countries are preparing for a period offurtherintegration and East-West cooperation, it seems worth-while to also consider the role ofthe EANIEs and the options for cooperation they represent. Moreover, the NIEs themselves are following development in Europe with some concern and are trying to adjust to the new situation as it emerges.

The phenomenal success of the East Asian Newly Industrializing Economies (NIEs) of Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore is now well-known and documented. Their success has been discussed to such an extent that it has become entrenched as part of the folklore of development economics. The Newly Industrializing Economies of East Asia takes a fresh look at the relevant literature and sifts the rhetoric from the reality. In the course of surveying the vast range of writing two competing paradigms become clear: the neo-classical approach which interprets the East Asian economic miracle as the predictable outcome of `good' policies; and the statist perspective which draws attention to the central role of the government in guiding East Asian economic development. Throughout the book the authors mix country-specific experiences with broader trends.

Offers a careful synthesis of a vast and disparate literature and makes it accessible to student readership. Points to the need to take a closer look at the future evolution of the East Asian NIEs in an era of democratisation.

In surveying the vast range of writing on the East Asian NIEs and their development paths, this book evaluates the competing roles of neo-classical approaches and central government intervention in guiding economic development.