Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:21:41.192Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Newly Industrializing Countries in the International System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Stephan Haggard
Stephan Haggard
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access

Abstract

Explanations of the growth of the newly industrializing countries (NICs) by neoclassical economists and dependency theorists neglect the role of politics in shaping development strategies. Different social configurations, state structures, and ideas about development help explain the divergent policy choices made by the export-oriented East Asian NICs—Korea and Taiwan—and the more “inward-looking” countries of Latin America, particularly Mexico and Brazil. These different strategic choices, in turn, account for variations in the patterns of external “dependency” that characterize countries in the two regions.

Type
Review Articles
Information
World Politics , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , January 1986 , pp. 343 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1986

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

1 There is no clear, unambiguous definition of the “newly industrializing countries.” Different writers have used different indicators, including level of industrialization, rates af growth and, most frequently, level or rate of growth of manufactured exports. For aggregate studies stressing the effect of the NICs on world trade, investment, and production, see Beenstock, Michael, The World Economy in Transition (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983)Google Scholar; The World Economy in Transition (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983)Google Scholar; Cline, William R., Exports of Manufactures from Developing Countries (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1984)Google Scholar; Exports of Manufactures from Developing Countries (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1984)Google Scholar; Keesing, Donald, World Trade and Output of Manufactures: Structural Trends and Developing Countries' Exports (Washington, DC: World Bank staff Working Paper No. 316, 1979)Google Scholar; World Trade and Output of Manufactures: Structural Trends and Developing Countries' Exports (Washington, DC: World Bank staff Working Paper No. 316, 1979)Google Scholar; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, The Impact of the Newly Industrializing Countries on Production and Trade in Manufactures (Paris: OECD, 1979)Google Scholar; The Impact of the Newly Industrializing Countries on Production and Trade in Manufactures (Paris: OECD, 1979)Google Scholar.

2 See, for example, the World Bank's World Development Report 1983 (New York: Oxford University Press for the World Bank, 1983)Google Scholar, and the critical discussion of “associationist” strategies in Ruggie, John Gerard, ed., The Antinomies of Interdependence (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; The Antinomies of Interdependence (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

3 See Fernando Fajnzylber, “Some Reflections on Southeast Asian Export Industrialization,” CEPAL Review (No. 15, 1981), 111-32; Ranis, Gustav, “Challenges and Opportunities Posed by Asia's Superexporters: Implications for Manufactured Exports from Latin America,” in Baer, Werner and Gillis, Malcolm, eds., Export Diversification and the New Protectionism (Champaign, IL: Bureau of Economic and Business Research and College of Commerce and Business Administration, University of Illinois, 1981)Google Scholar; Export Diversification and the New Protectionism (Champaign, IL: Bureau of Economic and Business Research and College of Commerce and Business Administration, University of Illinois, 1981)Google Scholar.

4 For theoretical discussions of the problem of policy-change from a public-choice perspective, see Olson, Mancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; The Rise and Decline of Nations (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982)Google Scholar, and Bates, Robert, Markets and States in Tropical Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Markets and States in Tropical Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981)Google Scholar. For Marxist analyses stressing societal constraint on state action, see Hamilton, Nora, The Limits of State Autonomy: Post-Revolutionary Mexico (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Limits of State Autonomy: Post-Revolutionary Mexico (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Block, Fred, “The Ruling Class Does Not Rule: Notes on the Marxist Theory of the State,” Socialist Revolution 7 (May-June 1977), 6–28Google Scholar. For an analysis of state autonomy from different perspectives, see Nordlinger, Eric, On the Autonomy of the Democratic State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; On the Autonomy of the Democratic State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Skocpol, Theda, States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979)Google Scholar, chap. 1; Gunnar Myrdal's discussion of the “soft” state, in The Challenge of World Poverty (New York: Vintage Books, 1970)Google Scholar; The Challenge of World Poverty (New York: Vintage Books, 1970)Google Scholar, chap. 7; Trimberger, Ellen Kay, Revolution from Above: Military Bureaucrats and Development in Japan, Turkey, Egypt, and Peru (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1978)Google Scholar; Revolution from Above: Military Bureaucrats and Development in Japan, Turkey, Egypt, and Peru (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1978)Google Scholar; Bob Jessop's review of Marxist theories, The Capitalist State (New York: New York University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; The Capitalist State (New York: New York University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; and Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda, eds., Bringing the State Back, In (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bringing the State Back, I” (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

5 In addition to the books by Evans and Gereffi, see Bennett, Douglas and Sharpe, Kenneth E., “Transnational Corporations and the Political Economy of Export Promotion: The Case of the Mexican Automobile Industry,” International Organization 33 (Spring 1979), 177–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Newfarmer, Richard, Transnational Conglomerates and the Economics of Dependent Development (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Transnational Conglomerates and the Economics of Dependent Development (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Newfarmer, Richard, ed., Profits, Progress and Poverty: Case Studies of International Industries in Latin America (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985)Google Scholar; Profits, Progress and Poverty: Case Studies of International Industries in Latin America (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985)Google Scholar. For two recent critiques of this literature, see Becker, Gary, The New Bourgeoisie and the Limits of Dependency (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The New Bourgeoisie and the Limits of Dependency (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)Google Scholar, and Grieco, Joseph M., Between Dependency and Autonomy: India's Experience with the International Computer Industry (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984)Google Scholar; Between Dependency and Autonomy: India's Experience with the International Computer Industry (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

6 For reviews of the economic growth process, see, for Korea, Kuznets, Paul W., Economic Growth and Structure in the Republic of Korea (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar; Economic Growth and Structure in the Republic of Korea (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar; and Mason, Edward and others, The Economic and Social Modernization ofKorea (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Economic and Social Modernization ofKorea (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980)Google Scholar, which summarizes the multi-volume “Studies in the Modernization of the Republic of Korea.” For Taiwan, see Lin, Ching-yuan, Industrialization in Taiwan, 1860-1970 (New York: Praeger, 1972)Google Scholar; Industrialization in Taiwan, 1860-1970 (New York: Praeger, 1972)Google Scholar; Ho, Samuel, Economic Development of Taiwan, 1860-1970 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar; Economic Development of Taiwan, 1860-1970 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar; and Galenson, Walter, ed., Economic Growth and Structural Change in Taiwan (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Economic Growth and Structural Change in Taiwan (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1979)Google Scholar. For Mexico, see Reynolds, Clark W., The Mexican Economy: Twentieth Century Structure and Growth (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970)Google Scholar; The Mexican Economy: Twentieth Century Structure and Growth (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970)Google Scholar; and Villareal, Rene, “The Policy of Import-Substituting Industrialization, 1929-1975” in Reyna, José Luis and Weinert, Richard, eds., Authoritarianism in Mexico (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1977)Google Scholar; Authoritarianism in Mexico (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1977)Google Scholar. For Brazil, see Fishlow, Albert, “Brazilian Development in Long-Term Perspective,” American Economic Review 70 (May 1980), 102-08Google Scholar; Economic Commission for Latin America, “Growth and Decline of Import Substitution in Brazil,” Economic Bulletin for Latin America 9 (March 1964), 1–59Google Scholar; Villela, Annibal V. and Suzigan, Wilson, Government Policy and the Economic Growth of Brazil 1889-1945 (Rio de Janeiro: Institute de Planejamento Economico e Social and Instituto de Pesquisas-INPES, 1977)Google Scholar; Government Policy and the Economic Growth of Brazil 1889-1945 (Rio de Janeiro: Institute de Planejamento Economico e Social and Instituto de Pesquisas-INPES, 1977)Google Scholar; Baer, Werner, The Brazilian Economy: Growth and Development, 2nd ed. (New York: Praeger, 1983)Google Scholar. For a useful comparison of Mexico and Brazil, see Graham, Douglas, “Mexican and Brazilian Economic Development: Legacies, Patterns and Performance,” in Hewlett, Sylvia Ann and Weinert, Richard, eds., Brazil and Mexico: Patterns in Late Development (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1982)Google Scholar; Brazil and Mexico: Patterns in Late Development (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1982)Google Scholar.

7 For a recent debate on how “dependent” 19th-century Latin American growth was, see D.C.M. Platt, “Dependency in Nineteenth-Century Latin America: An Historian Objects,” and Stein, Stanley J. and Stein, Barbara, “The Anatomy of ‘Autonomy,’” in Latin American Research Review 15 (No. 1, 1980), 113-30Google Scholar and 130-46, respectively; and , Stein and , Stein, The Colonial Heritage of Latin America: Essays on Economic Dependence in Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar; The Colonial Heritage of Latin America: Essays on Economic Dependence in Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar.

8 Cumings, Bruce, “The Origins and Development of the Northeast Asian Political Economy: Industrial Sectors, Product Cycles and Political Consequences,” International Organization 38 (Winter 1984), 1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and , Cumings, The Origins of the Korean War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; The Origins of the Korean War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981)Google Scholar, chaps. 1 and 2; Myers, Ramon and Peattie, Mark, eds., The Japanese Colonial Empire: 1895-1945 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar; The Japanese Colonial Empire: 1895-1945 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

9 See Cole, Allan, “The Political Roles of Taiwanese Entrepreneurs,” Asian Survey 7 (September 1967), 645-54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Hsiao, Hsin-Huang Michael, Government Agricultural Strategies in Taiwan and South Korea (Taipei: Academica Sinica, 1981)Google Scholar; Government Agricultural Strategies in Taiwan and South Korea (Taipei: Academica Sinica, 1981)Google Scholar.

11 On the general relationship between land ownership and income distribution, see Bigsten, Arne, Income Distribution and Development: Theory, Evidence and Policy (London: Heine-man, 1983)Google Scholar; Income Distribution and Development: Theory, Evidence and Policy (London: Heine-man, 1983), 86–88Google Scholar. See also Kuo, Shirley, The Taiwan Economy in Transition (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1983)Google Scholar; The Taiwan Economy in Transition (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1983)Google Scholar, chap. 3, and Ban, Sung Hwan, Moon, Pal Yong, and Perkins, Dwight, Rural Development (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Rural Development (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980)Google Scholar, chap. 11. For a more critical perspective on land reform in Taiwan, see Griffin, Keith, “An Assessment of Development in Taiwan,” World Development 1 (June 1973), 31–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Hamilton (fn. 4). See also Contreras, Ariel José, Mexico 1940: Industrialization y crisis politica (Mexico: Siglo XXI, 1977)Google Scholar; Mexico 1940: Industrialization y crisis politica (Mexico: Siglo XXI, 1977)Google Scholar; Mosk, Stanley, Industrial Revolution in Mexico (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1950)Google Scholar; Industrial Revolution in Mexico (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1950)Google Scholar, chaps. 2-5; and the pioneering work of Cordova, Arnaldo, La Politica de Masas del Cardenismo (Mexico, DF: Ediciones Era, 1974)Google Scholar; La Politica de Masas del Cardenismo (Mexico, DF: Ediciones Era, 1974)Google Scholar.

13 See Dean, Warren, The Industrialization of Sao Paulo 1880-1945 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969)Google Scholar; The Industrialization of Sao Paulo 1880-1945 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969)Google Scholar; Flynn, Peter, Brazil: A Political Analysis (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1978)Google Scholar; Brazil: A Political Analysis (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1978)Google Scholar, chaps. 4 and 5; Wirth, John D., The Politics of Brazilian Development 1930-1954 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar; The Politics of Brazilian Development 1930-1954 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Furtado, Celso, The Economic Growth of Brazil (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963)Google Scholar; The Economic Growth of Brazil (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963)Google Scholar.

14 See Ruth Berrins Collier, “Popular Sector Incorporation and Political Supremacy: Regime Evolution in Brazil and Mexico,” in Hewlett and Weinert (fn. 6); Eckstein, Susan and Evans, Peter, “Revolution as Cataclysm and Coup: Political Transformation and Economic Development in Mexico and Brazil,” in Comparative Studies in Sociology, Vol. I (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

15 The debates on income distribution in Brazil and Mexico are reviewed by David Felix, “Income Distribution Trends in Mexico and the Kuznets Curve,” and Sylvia Ann Hewlett, “Poverty and Inequality in Brazil,” both in Hewlett and Weinert (fn. 6). See also Sylvia Hewlett, Ann, The Cruel Dilemmas of Development: Twentieth-Century Brazil (New York: Basic Books, 1980)Google Scholar; The Cruel Dilemmas of Development: Twentieth-Century Brazil (New York: Basic Books, 1980)Google Scholar; Bergsman, Joel, Growth and Equity in Semi-Industrialized Countries, World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 351 (Washington, DC: World Bank, 1979)Google Scholar.

16 See Hirschman, Albert, A Bias for Hope (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971)Google Scholar; A Bias for Hope (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971)Google Scholar, chap. 3, “The Political Economy of Import-Substituting Industrialization in Latin America.”

17 See Amsden, Alice, “Taiwan's Economic History: A Case of Etatisme and a Challenge to Dependency Theory,” Modern China 5 (July 1979), 341-80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stephan Haggard and Chung-in Moon, “Liberal, Dependent or Mercantile: The South Korean State in the International System,” in Ruggie (fn. 2); and the special issue of IDS Bulletin 15 (April 1984), “Developmental States in East Asia: Capitalist and Socialist.” For a discussion of this debate with reference to Japan, see Johnson, Chalmers, MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar, chap. 1.

18 Balassa cites some evidence of this in Development Strategies in Semi-Industrial Countries (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Development Strategies in Semi-Industrial Countries (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981)Google Scholar. See also Wade, Robert, “Dirigisme Taiwan-Style,” IDS Bulletin 15 (April 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “State Intervention in ‘Outward-Looking’ Development: Neoclassical Theory and Taiwanese Practice,” in G. White and R. Wade, Developmental States in East Asia (Macmillan, forthcoming).

19 On state-owned enterprises in Korea, see Jones, Leroy, Public Enterprise and Economic Development: The Korean Case (Seoul: Korean Development Institute, 1976)Google Scholar; Public Enterprise and Economic Development: The Korean Case (Seoul: Korean Development Institute, 1976)Google Scholar. On the debates on the effect of the developmental state on the international trading system, see Vernon, Raymond, “The International Aspects of State-Owned Enterprises,” Journal of International Business Studies 10 (Winter 1979), 7–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Safarian, A. E., “Trade-Related Investment Issues,” in Cline, William, ed., Trade Policy in the 1980s (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1983)Google Scholar; Trade Policy in the 1980s (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1983)Google Scholar; Hufbauer, Gary Clyde and Erb, Joanna Shelton, Subsidies in International Trade (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1984)Google Scholar; Subsidies in International Trade (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1984)Google Scholar, chap. 3.

20 This point has been made in Cline, William, “Reciprocity”: A New Approach to World Trade Policy? (Washington DC: Institute for International Economics, 1982)Google Scholar; “Reciprocity”: A New Approach to World Trade Policy? (Washington DC: Institute for International Economics, 1982), 39Google Scholar, and in Tyson, Laura and Zysman, John, “American Industry in International Competition,” in , Zysman and , Tyson, eds., American Industry in International Competition (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; American Industry in International Competition (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

21 See Hofheinz, Ray and Calder, Kent, The Eastasia Edge (New York: Basic Books, 1982)Google Scholar; The Eastasia Edge (New York: Basic Books, 1982)Google Scholar. For revealing views by prominent planners from Singapore and Taiwan, respectively, see Goh Swee, Keng, The Practice of Economic Growth (Singapore: Federal Publications, 1977)Google Scholar; The Practice of Economic Growth (Singapore: Federal Publications, 1977)Google Scholar; Li, K. T., The Experience of Dynamic Economic Growth on Taiwan (Taipei: Mei Ya Publications, 1976)Google Scholar; The Experience of Dynamic Economic Growth on Taiwan (Taipei: Mei Ya Publications, 1976)Google Scholar.

22 See Bennett, Douglas and Sharp, Kenneth, “The State as Banker and Entrepreneur: The Last-Resort Character of the Mexican State's Economic Intervention, 1917-1976,” Comparative Politics 12 (January 1980), 165-89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 See Graham (fn. 6).

24 Trebat, Thomas, “Public Enterprises in Brazil and Mexico: A Comparison of Origins and Performance,” in Bruneau, Thomas C. and Faucher, Philippe, Authoritarian Capitalism (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Authoritarian Capitalism (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1981)Google Scholar; , Trebat, The State as Entrepreneur: The Case of Brazil (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; The State as Entrepreneur: The Case of Brazil (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Jones (fn. 19). A recent theoretical effort to explain patterns of state entrepreneurship is Duvall, Raymond D. and Freeman, John R., “The Techno-Bureaucratic Elite and the Entrepreneurial State in Dependent Industrialization,” American Political Science Review 77 (September 1983), 569-87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 See Cardoso, Fernando Henrique and Faletto, Enzo, Dependency and Development in Latin America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Dependency and Development in Latin America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979)Google Scholar.

26 , Kaufman, “Industrial Change and Authoritarian Rule in Latin America: A Concrete Review of the Bureaucratic Authoritarian Model,” in Collier, David, ed., The New Authoritarianism in Latin America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; The New Authoritarianism in Latin America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979)Google Scholar. See also the seminal work by Mamalakis, Markos J., “The Theory of Sectoral Clashes,” Latin American Research Review 13 (No. 3, 1969), 9–46Google Scholar.

27 Furtado, Celso, Diagnosis of the Brazilian Crisis (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Diagnosis of the Brazilian Crisis (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965)Google Scholar.

28 Fishlow, Albert, “Some Reflections on Post-1964 Economic Policy” in Stepan, Alfred, ed., Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973)Google Scholar; Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

29 O'Donnell's thesis concerning the relationship between “deepening” and authoritarianism is spelled out in his Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics (Berkeley: Institute for International Studies, University of California, 1973)Google Scholar; Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics (Berkeley: Institute for International Studies, University of California, 1973)Google Scholar. José Serra presents the most detailed criticism in “Three Mistaken Theses Regarding the Connection between Industrialization and Authoritarian Regimes,” in Collier (fn. 26).

30 This is the conclusion of the detailed economic study by Kahil, Raouf, Inflation and Economic Development in Brazil 1946-1963 (London: Oxford University Press, 1973)Google Scholar; Inflation and Economic Development in Brazil 1946-1963 (London: Oxford University Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

31 Kenneth Paul Erickson and Kevin J. Middlebrook, “The State and Organized Labor in Brazil and Mexico” in Hewlett and Weinert (fn. 6); Humphrey, John, Capitalist Control and Workers' Struggle in the Brazilian Auto Industry (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Capitalist Control and Workers' Struggle in the Brazilian Auto Industry (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Albert Fishlow, in Stepan (fn. 28); Wallerstein, Michael, “The Collapse of Democracy in Brazil: Its Economic Determinants,” Latin American Research Review 15 (No. 3, 1980), 3–4Google Scholar.

32 Taylor, Lance, “Mexico's Adjustment in the 1980s: Look Back Before Leaping Ahead,” in Feinberg, Richard E. and Kallab, Valeriana, eds., Adjustment Crisis in the Third World (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1984)Google Scholar; Adjustment Crisis in the Third World (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1984)Google Scholar; Frieden, Jeff, “Third World Indebted Industrialization: International Finance and State Capitalism in Mexico, Brazil, Algeria, and South Korea,” International Organization 35 (Summer 1981), 407-31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Diaz-Alejandro, Carlos, “Southern Cone Stabilization Plans,” in Cline, William and Weintraub, Sidney, eds., Economic Stabilization in Developing Countries (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1981)Google Scholar; Economic Stabilization in Developing Countries (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1981)Google Scholar; Foxley, Alejandro, Latin American Experiments in Neoconservative Economics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Latin American Experiments in Neoconservative Economics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Frenkel, Roberto and O'Donnell, Guillermo, “The ‘Stabilization Programs’ of the IMF and Their Internal Impacts,” in Fagen, Richard, ed., Capitalism and the State in U.S.-Latin American Relations (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Capitalism and the State in U.S.-Latin American Relations (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Sheahan, John, “Market-Oriented Economic Policies and Political Repression in Latin America,” Economic Development and Cultural Change 28 (January 1980), 267-91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robert Kaufman, “Democratic and Authoritarian Responses to Stabilization in Latin America,” and Haggard, Stephan, “The Politics of Stabilization: Lessons from the IMF's Extended Fund Facility,” in International Organization 39 (Summer 1985), 473–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar and 505-34, respectively.

33 , Deyo, Dependent Development and Industrial Order: An Asian Case Study (New York: Praeger, 1981)Google Scholar; Dependent Development and Industrial Order: An Asian Case Study (New York: Praeger, 1981)Google Scholar.

34 Turner, H. A., The Last Colony: But Whose? A Study of the Labour Movement, Labour Market and Labour Relations in Hong Kong (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980)Google Scholar; The Last Colony: But Whose? A Study of the Labour Movement, Labour Market and Labour Relations in Hong Kong (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980)Google Scholar. For a comparative analysis of Asian labor, see Deyo, Fred, “Export Manufacturing and Labor: The Asian Case,” in Berquist, Charles, ed., Labor in the Capitalist Economy (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1984)Google Scholar; Labor in the Capitalist Economy (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1984)Google Scholar.

35 Fields, Gary, “Employment, Income Distribution and Economic Growth in Seven Small Open Economies,” The Economic Journal 94 (March 1984), 74–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a dissenting opinion, see Koo, Hagen, “The Political Economy of Income Distribution in South Korea: The Impact of the State's Industrialization Policies,” World Development 12 (October 1984), 1029-37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 See Story, Dale, “Trade Politics in the Third World: A Case Study of the Mexican GATT Decision,” International Organization 36 (Autumn 1982), 767-94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Graham (fn. 6), 31-36. For an analysis of the political organization of Mexican business, see Dale Story, “Industrial Elites in Mexico: Political Ideology and Influence,” Journal of lnteramerican Studies (August 1983), 351-76; Dominguez, Jorge, “Business Nationalism: Latin American National Business Attitudes toward Multinational Enterprises,” in , Dominguez, ed., Economic Issues and Political Conflict: US-Latin American Relations (London: Butterworth, 1982)Google Scholar; Economic Issues and Political Conflict: US-Latin American Relations (London: Butterworth, 1982), 16–68Google Scholar; Gereffi, Gary and Evans, Peter, “Transnational Corporations, Dependent Development and State Policy in the Semiperiphery: A Comparison of Brazil and Mexico,” Latin American Research Review 16 (No. 3, 1981), 31–64Google Scholar.

38 Geiger, Theodore and Geiger, Frances M., Tales of Two City States (Washington, DC: National Planning Association, 1973)Google Scholar; Tales of Two City States (Washington, DC: National Planning Association, 1973)Google Scholar; Youngson, A. J., Hong Kong: Economic Growth and Policy (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Hong Kong: Economic Growth and Policy (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Miners, N. J., The Government and Politics of Hong Kong, 3d ed. (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Quah, Jon S. T., Chee, Chan Heng, and Meow, Seah Chee, Government and Politics in Singapore (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar; Government and Politics in Singapore (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

39 See Chee, Chan Heng, Singapore: The Politics of Survival, 1965-1967 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1971)Google Scholar. For a radical analysis, see Buchanan, Iain, Singapore in Southeast Asia (London: G. Bell & Sons, 1972)Google Scholar; Singapore in Southeast Asia (London: G. Bell & Sons, 1972)Google Scholar.

40 On the assembly industry in Mexico, see Joseph Grunwald and Flamm, Kenneth, The Global Factory: Foreign Assembly and International Trade (Washington, DC: The Institution, 1985)Google Scholar; The Global Factory: Foreign Assembly and International Trade (Washington, DC: The Institution, 1985)Google Scholar, chap. 4.

41 Baer, Werner, Newfarmer, Richard, and Trebat, Thomas, “On State Capitalism in Brazil: Some New Issues and Questions,” Interamerican Economic Affairs 30 (Winter 1976), 69–92Google Scholar; Fitzgerald, E.V.K., “The State and Capital Accumulation in Mexico,” Journal of Latin American Studies 10 (November 1978), 263-82CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and , Fitzgerald, The Political Economy of Peru, 1956-1978 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; The Political Economy of Peru, 1956-1978 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979)Google Scholar. See also the review by Canak, William, “The Peripheral State Debate: State Capitalist and Bureaucratic Authoritarian Regimes in Latin America,” Latin American Research Review 19 (No. 1, 1984), 3–36Google Scholar.

42 For different interpretations of the “crisis” of export-led growth, see Hamilton, Clive, “Capitalist Industrialization in East Asia's Four Little Tigers,” Journal of Contemporary Asia 13 (1983), 35–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stephan Haggard and Tun-jen Cheng, “State Strategies, Local and Foreign Capital in the 'Gang of Four',” in Fred Deyo, ed., The Political Economy of the New Asian Industrialism (Cornell University Press, forthcoming).

43 See Rostow, W. W., Why the Poor Get Richer and the Rich Slow Down (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Why the Poor Get Richer and the Rich Slow Down (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980)Google Scholar, chap. 6.

44 For a review of recent protectionism, see Anjaria, S. J., Iqbal, Z., Kirmani, N. and Perez, L. L., Developments in International Trade Policy (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 1982)Google Scholar; Developments in International Trade Policy (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 1982)Google Scholar; Ballance, Robert and Sinclair, Stuart, Collapse and Survival: Industry Strategies in a Changing World (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983)Google Scholar; Collapse and Survival: Industry Strategies in a Changing World (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983)Google Scholar.

45 Cline, William R., “Can the East Asian Model of Development Be Generalized?” World Development 10 (February 1982), 81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 , Hager, “Protectionism and Autonomy: How to Preserve Free Trade in Europe,” International Affairs 58 (Summer 1982), 413-28CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Michael Beenstock (fn. 1) develops a model of the slowdown in the world economy during the seventies that assigns a central role to the emergence of the newly industrializing countries.

47 Hager (fn. 46), 420.

48 For a conservative view of the link between the welfare state and protectionism, see Krauss, Melvyn, The New Protectionism: The Welfare State and International Trade (New York: International Center for Economic Policy Studies, 1979)Google Scholar; The New Protectionism: The Welfare State and International Trade (New York: International Center for Economic Policy Studies, 1979)Google Scholar.

49 Also see Zysman and Tyson (fn. 20); Brock, William and Magee, Stephen, “The Economics of Special Interest Politics: The Case of the Tariff,” American Economic Review 68 (May 1978), 246-50Google Scholar.

50 Pastor, Robert, Congress and the Politics of U.S. Foreign Economic Policy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Congress and the Politics of U.S. Foreign Economic Policy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Lenway, Stefanie, The Politics of U.S. International Trade Policy (Boston: Pitman, 1985)Google Scholar; The Politics of U.S. International Trade Policy (Boston: Pitman, 1985)Google Scholar.

51 Wells, Louis T., Third World Multinationals: The Rise of Foreign Investment from De veloping Countries (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Third World Multinationals: The Rise of Foreign Investment from De veloping Countries (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

51 , Cardoso, “Associated-Dependent Development: Theoretical and Practical Implications,” in Stepan, Alfred, ed., Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973)Google Scholar; Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973)Google Scholar. Other Marxist reformulations seeking to account for the NICs include Bill Warren's stimulating return to Marx, Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism (London: New Left Books, 1980)Google Scholar; Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism (London: New Left Books, 1980)Google Scholar, chap. 3; Wallerstein, Immanuel, “Semi-peripheral Countries and the Contemporary World Crisis,” Theory and Society 3 (December 1976), 461-83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chilcote, Ronald, ed., Dependency and Marxism: Toward a Resolution of the Debate (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Dependency and Marxism: Toward a Resolution of the Debate (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1982)Google Scholar. On the applicability of the dependency approach to East Asia, see Haggard and Cheng (fn. 42); Koo (fn. 35); Fblker Frobl, Heinrichs, Jürgen, and Kreye, Otto, The New International Division of Labour: Structural Unemployment in Industrialised Countries and Industrialisation in veloping Countries (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980)Google Scholar; The New International Division of Labour: Structural Unemployment in Industrialised Countries and Industrialisation in veloping Countries (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980)Google Scholar.

53 In addition to the volumes under review, see the works cited in fn. 5.

54 Hymer, Stephen, The International Operations of National Firms: A Study in Foreign Investment (Cambridge: MIT Monographs in Economics 14, 1976)Google Scholar; The International Operations of National Firms: A Study in Foreign Investment (Cambridge: MIT Monographs in Economics 14, 1976)Google Scholar; Kindelberger, Charles, American Investment Abroad (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969)Google Scholar; American Investment Abroad (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

55 Moran, Theodore, Multinational Corporations and the Politics of Dependence: Copper in Chile (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974)Google Scholar; Multinational Corporations and the Politics of Dependence: Copper in Chile (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974)Google Scholar; Stepan, Alfred, The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978)Google Scholar; The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

56 See Deyo (fns. 33 and 34); and Buchanan (fn. 39).

57 See Youngson (fn. 38), chap. 2.

58 Kim, Kwan Bok, The Korea-Japan Treaty Crisis and the Instability of the Korean Political System (New York: Praeger, 1971)Google Scholar; The Korea-Japan Treaty Crisis and the Instability of the Korean Political System (New York: Praeger, 1971)Google Scholar.

59 Arriola, Carlos, “Los Grupos Empresariales Frente el Estado,” Foro Internacional 16 (April-June, 1976), 449-95Google Scholar.

60 For an early statement of this conflict, see Luiz Carlos Pereira, Bresser, O Colapso de uma Alianca de Classes (São Paulo: Editora Brasiliense, 1978)Google Scholar; O Colapso de uma Alianca de Classes (São Paulo: Editora Brasiliense, 1978)Google Scholar.

61 See Jacoby, Neil H., U.S. Aid to Taiwan: A Study of Foreign Aid, Self-Help, and Development (New York: Praeger, 1966)Google Scholar; U.S. Aid to Taiwan: A Study of Foreign Aid, Self-Help, and Development (New York: Praeger, 1966)Google Scholar.

62 See Miners (fn. 38).

63 Fernando H. Cardoso, “The Originality of a Copy: CEPAL and the Idea of Development,” CEPAL Review (No. 4, 1977), 7-40.

64 Foxley (fn. 32).

65 For an interpretation that puts the growth of the NICs in a very long historical perspective, see Reynolds, Lloyd, “The Spread of Economic Growth to the Third World: 1850-1980,” Journal of Economic Literature 21 (September 1983), 941-80Google Scholar.