Industrial policy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007) |
An industrial policy is a set of actions executed by interventionist or mixed-economy countries in order to affect the way in which factors of production are being distributed across national industries. Many types of industrial policies contain common elements with other types of interventionist practices such as trade policy and fiscal policy. An example of an industrial policy is industrialization by substitution of imports, where trade barriers are imposed on some key sectors of manufacture. These privileged industrial sectors are expected to take advantage of artificial protections and start expanding at faster rates than they would otherwise. The term industrial refers not only to manufacturing, but instead to the much broader meaning of production of goods and services.
An active intervention in industrial development is the policy of most if not all countries in the world. Generally, what motivates governments to pursue an industrial policy is their concern of deindustrialization, a problem that seems to justify the use of interventionist practices, since manufacture has been considered the engine of growth in economic theory. Even the United States, a nation historically in favor of "free-trade", has implemented strong tax, tariff, and trade laws to protect itself from "dumping", the flooding of a market by a competing nation with goods or services below market prices in order to gain an advantage over domestic firms.
In Japan, the MITI has often taken an active hand in development of major industries, particularly electronics and software. The impact of this intervention is disputed but the role of Industrial Policy in the 'East Asian Miracle' is now more generally accepted since the Japanese model was successfully imitated by South Korea and Taiwan, which similarly developed advanced industrial sectors and enjoyed similar advances in living standards.
Some authors support the link between government intervention and the successful industrial development in East Asia [1]. Benefits from foreign investment such as the transfer of technology, skills and managerial techniques that could help infant industries become internationally competitive were captured using policies such as local content rules and joint-venture regulations. As such, the development of infant industries does not simply involve protectionism as the infant industry argument suggests, but is dependent on a country's ability to learn directly from foreign direct investment. Such policies have traditionally been central to the industrial policies of countries that are attempting to catch up with technologically and economically more advanced states. A good example is the US and European attempt to catch up with Great Britain during the 18th and 19th century (see Ha-Joon Chang's 'Kicking Away the Ladder'). Many of these domestic policy choices are now prohibited by the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures.
Today most industrial policies are subordinated to tax, tariff and trade rules of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and various trade pacts promising various degrees of "free trade", which in practice means limited subsidy and no protectionism of any one industry. However, notable exceptions including agricultural subsidies in both Europe and the US, and cultural subsidies in Canada, prove that the principle of industrial policy is alive and well, and merely retreating into the shadows.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Wade, Robert. (1992). Governing the market. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[edit] See also
- investment policy
- immigration policy
- tax, tariff and trade
- energy policy
- De-industrialization crisis
