Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:36:12.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Industrial Policies in OECD Countries: An Overview

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

David McKay
Affiliation:
Department of Government, University of Essex
Wyn Grant
Affiliation:
Department of Politics, University of Warwick

Abstract

Since the financial economic crises of the early 1970s the debate about economic and industrial affairs has intensified everywhere with, in many countries,the focus of economic policy shifting from demand to supply side remedies. What is striking about the post-1974 pattern is the extent to which countries have diverged in economic performance. The results of attempts to explain these differences are contradictory both between and within academic disciplines, though there is general agreement that the microeconomic policies of government can, and in most cases have, affected economic performance. The objectives of the papers in this special issue are (1)to describe the nature of the industrial policy agenda in each country; (2) to describe the instruments available and the scale of assistance provided to industry directly or indirectly; (3) to provide an outline of the institutional and political context in which policy is formulated in each country. Three broad comparative conclusions can be drawn: (1) we should not be too dogmatic about inferring the preconditions (e.g. type of party competition or bureaucratic structure) for apparently ‘successful’ policies; (2) the pursuit of a coherent industrial strategy appears to depend on socio/political condition which have been present in some countries but absent in others, such as a broad acceptance among political elites on the need to play an active part in helping industry to adapt to change and the existence of good communications between political/bureaucratic and economic actors, including a broad acceptance by private investors of the need for government intervention ; (3) even in countries which meet these conditions, particular industrial strategies change over time, sometimes dramatically, though this suggests that these countries have a greater capacity to adapt to change, particularly in response to external events, than countries characterised by policy inertia or policy confusion.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barrington Moore, J. (1966) Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lords and Peasants in the Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, Pierre (1981) State, centre and bureaucracy, Government and Opposition, 16 (1), 5873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EEC (1981) Industrial Policies in the Commmunity, State Intervention and Structural Adjustment. Brussels: EEC.Google Scholar
Grant, Wyn (1982) The Political Economy of Industrial Policy. London: Buttenvorths.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, Peter (1978) Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
McKay, David (1983) The political economy of economic policy. In Jones, Barry (ed.), New Perspectives on Political Economy. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
OECD (1975) Adjustment for Trade: Studies on Industrial Adjustment Problems and Policies. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (1979) The Case for Positive Adjustment. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Vogel, Ezra (1979) Japan as Number One: Lessons for America, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar