Characterise in continuation of this the differences between regional integration in Europe and The Far East.
Send email to admin eh. Moving along an income growth trajectory through expansion of manufacturing is hardly unique. Indeed Western Europe, Canada, Australia and the United States all attained high levels of income per capita by shifting from agrarian-based production to manufacturing and technologically sophisticated service sector activity.
Investment-led growth Domestic investment in industry and infrastructure was the driving force behind growth in Japanese output. Both private and public sectors invested in infrastructure, national and local governments serving as coordinating agents for infrastructure build-up.
Investment in manufacturing capacity was largely left to the private sector. Rising domestic savings made increasing capital accumulation possible. Japanese growth was investment-led, not export-led. Total factor productivity growth — achieving more output per unit of input — was rapid. On the supply side, total factor productivity growth was extremely important.
Scale economies — the reduction in per unit costs due to increased levels of output — contributed to total factor productivity growth.
Scale economies existed due to geographic concentration, to growth of the national economy, and to growth in the output of individual companies.
The social capacity for importing and adapting foreign technology improved and this contributed to total factor productivity growth: At the household level, investing in education of children improved social capability. At the firm level, creating internalized labor markets that bound firms to workers and workers to firms, thereby giving workers a strong incentive to flexibly adapt to new technology, improved social capability.
At the government level, industrial policy that reduced the cost to private firms of securing foreign technology enhanced social capacity. Shifting out of low-productivity agriculture into high productivity manufacturing, mining, and construction contributed to total factor productivity growth.
Dualism Sharply segmented labor and capital markets emerged in Japan after the s. The capital intensive sector enjoying high ratios of capital to labor paid relatively high wages, and the labor intensive sector paid relatively low wages.
Dualism contributed to income inequality and therefore to domestic social unrest. After a series of public policy reforms addressed inequality and erased much of the social bitterness around dualism that ravaged Japan prior to World War II. The remainder of this article will expand on a number of the themes mentioned above.
The appendix reviews quantitative evidence concerning these points. The conclusion of the article lists references that provide a wealth of detailed evidence supporting the points above, which this article can only begin to explore. Achievements of Tokugawa Japan Why Japan? The system of confederation government introduced at the end of the fifteenth century placed certain powers in the hands of feudal warlords, daimyo, and certain powers in the hands of the shogun, the most powerful of the warlords.
Each daimyo — and the shogun — was assigned a geographic region, a domain, being given taxation authority over the peasants residing in the villages of the domain. Intercourse with foreign powers was monopolized by the shogun, thereby preventing daimyo from cementing alliances with other countries in an effort to overthrow the central government.
The samurai military retainers of the daimyo were forced to abandon rice farming and reside in the castle town headquarters of their daimyo overlord. In exchange, samurai received rice stipends from the rice taxes collected from the villages of their domain. By removing samurai from the countryside — by demilitarizing rural areas — conflicts over local water rights were largely made a thing of the past.
As a result irrigation ditches were extended throughout the valleys, and riverbanks were shored up with stone embankments, facilitating transport and preventing flooding. The sustained growth of proto-industrialization in urban Japan, and its widespread diffusion to villages after was also inseparable from the productivity growth in paddy rice production and the growing of industrial crops like tea, fruit, mulberry plant growing that sustained the raising of silk cocoons and cotton.
Readiness to emulate the West As a result of these domestic advances, Japan was well positioned to take up the Western challenge. It harnessed its infrastructure, its high level of literacy, and its proto-industrial distribution networks to the task of emulating Western organizational forms and Western techniques in energy production, first and foremost enlisting inorganic energy sources like coal and the other fossil fuels to generate steam power.
Having intensively developed the organic economy depending upon natural energy flows like wind, water and fire, Japanese were quite prepared to master inorganic production after the Black Ships of the Americans forced Japan to jettison its long-standing autarky.
From Balanced to Dualistic Growth, It created infrastructure that facilitated industrialization. It built a modern navy and army that could keep the Western powers at bay and establish a protective buffer zone in North East Asia that eventually formed the basis for a burgeoning Japanese empire in Asia and the Pacific.
Central government reforms in education, finance and transportation Jettisoning the confederation style government of the Tokugawa era, the new leaders of the new Meiji government fashioned a unitary state with powerful ministries consolidating authority in the capital, Tokyo.
The freshly minted Ministry of Education promoted compulsory primary schooling for the masses and elite university education aimed at deepening engineering and scientific knowledge. The Ministry of Finance created the Bank of Japan inlaying the foundations for a private banking system backed up a lender of last resort.
The government began building a steam railroad trunk line girding the four major islands, encouraging private companies to participate in the project.
Not surprisingly, the merchants in Osaka, the merchant capital of Tokugawa Japan, already well versed in proto-industrial production, turned to harnessing steam and coal, investing heavily in integrated spinning and weaving steam-driven textile mills during the s.Every one of the major East Asian economies—Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, and India—is running a substantial trade surplus with China.
During to , East Asia experienced a huge transformation in its economic development which is now widely referred to as the East Asian economic miracle. This was largely a result of the growth of eight economies known as the high-performing Asian economies, hereinafter HPAEs.
focus on East Asia, which includes Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); for it was here that the conventional wisdom about the possibility of, and the preconditions for.
Northeast Asia is the economic and geopolitical region comprising China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Mongolia, and Russia’s far . East Asia became an area of early modern economic power starting with the Meiji Restoration in the late 19th century when Japan rapidly transformed itself as the first and only industrial economic power in East Asia.
From the late nineteenth century to the end of the s, Japan was the . The role of government in East Asian economic development has been a contentious issue. Two competing views have shaped enquiries into the source of the rapid growth of the high-performing Asian economies and attempts to derive a general lesson for other developing economies: the market-friendly view, according to which government .