IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ekm/repojs/v40y2020i2p405-410id696.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The liberalization trap: Why did Latin America fall behind in the 1980s while East Asia continue to grow?

Author

Listed:
  • Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira

Abstract

In the 1980s, while the East Asian countries continued to grow, the Latin American countries stopped, and since then are falling behind. The cause was not the “middleincome trap”, but the “liberalization trap”. Differently from the East Asian, the Latin American countries suffer the Dutch Disease, but were able to industrialize because they used high import tariffs on manufactured goods to neutralize this long-term overvaluation of the exchange rate. In the 1980s, however, trade liberalization dismounted this mechanism. The ensuing competitive disadvantage produced deindustrialization and low growth. JEL Classification: O11; O24.

Suggested Citation

  • Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira, 2020. "The liberalization trap: Why did Latin America fall behind in the 1980s while East Asia continue to grow?," Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, Center of Political Economy, vol. 40(2), pages 405-410.
    • Handle: RePEc:ekm:repojs:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:405-410:id:696
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://centrodeeconomiapolitica.org.br/repojs/index.php/journal/article/view/696/686
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Middle-income trap; trade and financial liberalization trap; Dutch Disease;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O11 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O24 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Trade Policy; Factor Movement; Foreign Exchange Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ekm:repojs:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:405-410:id:696. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Brazilian Journal of Political Economy (Brazil) (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://centrodeeconomiapolitica.org/repojs/index.php/journal/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.