IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/badest/0512.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Initial Trade Policy Focus of the High Performing Asian Economies: A Critical Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Rahim, Mia Mahmudur

    (PhD Candidate, Macquaire Law School , Macquaire University, Australia.)

Abstract

It is generally agreed that national trade policies of Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong played an important role behind the success of the High Performing Asian Economies (HPAEs). These countries exercised different policies with different implementation strategies at the initial stages of their economic success but resulted almost the same success. Thus, on the one hand, they followed some different ways following their specific needs and, on the other hand, maintained the same underlying principles for their national trade policies. They were although pragmatic in their economic policy focus, they did not adopt any common model or blueprint policy rather their strategies were followed by their specific strength, weakness and goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahim, Mia Mahmudur, 2011. "Initial Trade Policy Focus of the High Performing Asian Economies: A Critical Assessment," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 34(1), pages 87-102, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:badest:0512
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bids.org.bd/uploads/publication/BDS/34/34-1/05_rahim.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ito, Takatoshi & Krueger, Anne O. (ed.), 1993. "Trade and Protectionism," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226386683, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bin, Sheng, 2000. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy in China," Working Papers 10/2000, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Politics & Philosophy.
    2. Marcus Noland, 2004. "Selective Intervention and Growth: The Case of Korea," Chapters, in: Michael G. Plummer (ed.), Empirical Methods in International Trade, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Tain-Jy Chen & Meng-chun Liu, 1995. "Bilateral Negotiations and Multilateral Trade: The Case of Taiwan-U.S. Trade Talks," NBER Working Papers 5324, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Lee, In Hyeock (Ian) & Hong, Eunsuk & Makino, Shige, 2020. "The effect of non-conventional outbound foreign direct investment (FDI) on the domestic employment of multinational enterprises (MNEs)," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(3).
    5. Marcus Noland & Howard Pack, 2002. "Industrial Policies and Growth: Lessons From International Experience," Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies Book Series, in: Norman Loayza & Raimundo Soto & Norman Loayza (Series Editor) & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel (Series Editor) (ed.),Economic Growth: Sources, Trends, and Cycles, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 9, pages 251-308, Central Bank of Chile.
    6. Kenneth Flamm, 1993. "Semiconductor Dependency and Strategic Trade Policy," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(1 Microec), pages 249-333.
    7. Diwan, Ishac & Hoekman, Bernard, 1999. "Competition, Complementarity and Contagion in East Asia," CEPR Discussion Papers 2112, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. de la Torre, Augusto & Didier, Tatiana & Pinat, Magali, 2014. "Can Latin America tap the globalization upside ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6837, The World Bank.
    9. Urata, Shujiro, 1998. "Explaining the poor performance of Japanese direct investment in the United States," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 49-62, January.
    10. Park, Sangin, 2009. "An empirical evaluation of the 1986 Semiconductor Trade Arrangement," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 349-357, December.
    11. Dutt, Pushan & Mitra, Devashish, 2009. "Explaining Agricultural Distortion Patterns : The Roles of Ideology, Inequality, Lobbying and Public Finance," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 50299, World Bank.
    12. Gawande, Kishore & Hoekman, Bernard, 2006. "Lobbying and Agricultural Trade Policy in the United States," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 527-561, July.
    13. William Easterly, 1995. "Explaining Miracles: Growth Regressions Meet the Gang of Four," NBER Chapters, in: Growth Theories in Light of the East Asian Experience, pages 267-299, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Lane, Nathaniel, 2016. "Manufacturing Revolutions: Industrial Policy and Industrialization in South Korea," SocArXiv 6tqax, Center for Open Science.
    15. Kotabe, Masaaki & Wheiler, Kent W., 1998. "Perceptions of anticompetitive practices in Japan and the market performance of foreign firms," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 173-200, November.
    16. K. C. Fung, 1998. "Accounting for Chinese Trade: Some National and Regional Considerations," NBER Chapters, in: Geography and Ownership as Bases for Economic Accounting, pages 173-204, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. David A. Penn & Joachim Zietz, 2010. "The Development of Water Rights in Colorado: An Empirical Analysis," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 55(2), pages 24-35, November.
    18. María Angélica Arbeláez & Sebastián Higuera & Roberto Steiner & Sandra Zuluaga, 2018. "Protecting “sensitive” agricultural products in Colombia : a political economy approach," Coyuntura Económica, Fedesarrollo, vol. 48(1-2), pages 153-205, December.
    19. Liu, Meng-chun, 2002. "Determinants of Taiwan's Trade Liberalization: The Case of a Newly Industrialized Country," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 975-989, June.
    20. Gawande, Kishore & Hoekman, Bernard, 2009. "Why Governments Tax or Subsidize Trade: Evidence from Agriculture," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 50300, World Bank.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade Policy Focus; High Performing Asian Economies; Critical Assessment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General

    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:ris:badest:0512. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Meftaur Rahman, Cheif Publication Officer, BIDS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bidssbd.html .

    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.