Developmental state, n.: the government, motivated by desire for economic advancement, intervenes in industrial affairs. The notion of the developmental state has come under attack in recent years. Critics charge that Japan's success in putting this notion into practice has not been replicated elsewhere, that the concept threatens the purity of freemarket economics, and that its shortcomings have led to financial turmoil in Asia. In this informative and thought-provoking book, a team of distinguished scholars revisits this notion to assess its continuing utility and establish a common vocabulary for debates on these issues. Drawing on new political and economic theories and emphasizing recent events, the authors examine the East Asian experience to show how the developmental state involves a combination of political, bureaucratic, and moneyed influences that shape economic life in the region. Taking as its point of departure Chalmers Johnson's account of the Japanese developmental state, the book explores the interplay of forces that have determined the structure of opportunity in the region. The authors critically address the argument for centralized political involvement in industrial development (with a new contribution by Johnson), describe the historical impact of colonialism and the Cold War, consider new ideas in economics, and compare the experiences of East Asian countries with those of France, Brazil, Mexico, and India.

This open access book modifies and revitalizes the concept of the ‘developmental state’ to understand the politics of emerging economy through nuanced analysis on the roles of human agency in the context of structural transformation. In other words, there is a revived interest in the ‘developmental state’ concept. The nature of the ‘emerging state’ is characterized by its attitude toward economic development and industrialization. Emerging states have engaged in the promotion of agriculture, trade, and industry and played a transformative role to pursue a certain path of economic development. Their success has cast doubt about the principle of laissez faire among the people in the developing world. This doubt, together with the progress of democratization, has prompted policymakers to discover when and how economic policies should deviate from laissez faire, what prevents political leaders and state institutions from being captured by vested interests, and what induce them to drive economic development. This book offers both historical and contemporary case studies from Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Rwanda. They illustrate how institutions are designed to be developmental, how political coalitions are formed to be growth-oriented, and how technocratic agencies are embedded in a network of business organizations as a part of their efforts for state building.

This book problematises the statist underpinnings of the concept of the ‘developmental state,’ in terms of both state–society and national–global relations, challenging the notion that the state is the agent of national development qua being autonomous from the domestic and global economies. Presenting a thorough and comprehensive critical assessment of the extant approaches and theories of the Korean developmental state in particular, this book demonstrates that the existing literature, including Marxist critiques, only inadequately and partially challenge statism. It examines how statism reinforces and is reinforced by ‘Third World Developmentalism’, the idea that ‘development’ is in itself a positive goal and that a nationally autonomous mode of development should be promoted as a means of empowerment. In opposition, this book offers a critique of statism by constructing an alternative theoretical framework, extending Marx’s concept of commodity fetishism to state–society and national–global relations. Drawing on a new theoretical framework and significant Korean literature, The State, Class and Developmentalism in South Korea offers a novel historical interpretation and critique of the developmental state in the Korean context. As such, it will be useful to students and scholars of Asian studies, Development Studies and International Political Economy.

Why does state building sometimes promote economic growth and in other cases impede it? Through an analysis of political and economic development in four countries—Turkey, Syria, Korea, and Taiwan—this book explores the origins of political-economic institutions and the mechanisms connecting them to economic outcomes. David Waldner extends our understanding of the political underpinnings of economic development by examining the origins of political coalitions on which states and their institutions depend. He first provides a political model of institutional change to analyze how elites build either cross-class or narrow coalitions, and he examines how these arrangements shape specific institutions: state-society relations, the nature of bureaucracy, fiscal structures, and patterns of economic intervention. He then links these institutions to economic outcomes through a bargaining model to explain why countries such as Korea and Taiwan have more effectively overcome the collective dilemmas that plague economic development than have others such as Turkey and Syria. The latter countries, he shows, lack institutional solutions to the problems that surround productivity growth. The first book to compare political and economic development in these two regions, State Building and Late Development draws on, and contributes to, arguments from political sociology and political economy. Based on a rigorous research design, the work offers both a finely drawn comparison of development and a compellingly argued analysis of the character and consequences of "precocious Keynesianism," the implementation of Keynesian demand-stimulus policies in largely pre-industrial economies.

In recent years, debate on the state's economic role has too often devolved into diatribes against intervention. Peter Evans questions such simplistic views, offering a new vision of why state involvement works in some cases and produces disasters in others. To illustrate, he looks at how state agencies, local entrepreneurs, and transnational corporations shaped the emergence of computer industries in Brazil, India, and Korea during the seventies and eighties. Evans starts with the idea that states vary in the way they are organized and tied to society. In some nations, like Zaire, the state is predatory, ruthlessly extracting and providing nothing of value in return. In others, like Korea, it is developmental, promoting industrial transformation. In still others, like Brazil and India, it is in between, sometimes helping, sometimes hindering. Evans's years of comparative research on the successes and failures of state involvement in the process of industrialization have here been crafted into a persuasive and entertaining work, which demonstrates that successful state action requires an understanding of its own limits, a realistic relationship to the global economy, and the combination of coherent internal organization and close links to society that Evans called "embedded autonomy."

The Sociology of Development Handbook gathers essays that reflect the range of debates in development sociology and in the interdisciplinary study and practice of development. The essays address the pressing intellectual challenges of today, including internal and international migration, transformation of political regimes, globalization, changes in household and family formations, gender dynamics, technological change, population and economic growth, environmental sustainability, peace and war, and the production and reproduction of social and economic inequality.

This review evaluates the role of the state in development, offering a new framework for understanding what capabilities states need to overcome different types of market failures. This framework is employed to understand the successes and failures of state-led development in Malaysia. The review addresses three key questions. First, what do we know about developmental states and why they emerged? Second, what have developmental states achieved? In answering this question, I look not only at growth but also at structural transformation, economic “upgrading,” equity, and human capability enhancement. In contrast to the idea of a single “East Asian model” of development, I find five distinct development trajectories. Third, how did developmental states utilize state structures to pursue development? To answer this final question, I examine in depth the history of state-led development in Malaysia—including agricultural, industrial, and social policies. This case study sheds light on what specific institutional and political capacities helped Malaysia to improve productivity in agriculture, expand the manufacturing sector, and reduce inequality. It also explores why Malaysia has been less successful in developing linkages with the export-based manufacturing sector.