Privredno čudo zemalja istočne i jugoistočne Azije
The East Asian and the Southeast Asian economic miracle
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Brz privredni rast azijskih novoindustrijalizovanih zemalja (NiZ), poznat kao azijsko privredno cudo,
namece dva pitanja: prvo, koji faktori su doprineli takvom rastu i drugo, da li druge zemlje u razvoju
(ZUR) mogu da repliciraju iste politike radi iniciranja jednako brzog rasta.
Svi se slažu da su azijske NiZ zabeležile spektakularan rast, ali ne postoji saglasnost zašto su ove zemlje
sasvim iznenada i neocekivano pocele da rastu tako brzo. Kao podrška razlicitim gledištima o poreklu
privrednog cuda, razvijen je citav niz tzv. stilizovanih cinjenica. Medutim, sveukupno, ne postoje ni
jednostavni, ni definitivni odgovori.
Postoji saglasnost da ne postoji jedan jedini azijski model razvoja. Medutim, svakako postoje odredene
slicnosti u pristupima razvoju Japana, zemalja Istocne Azije (IA) i zemalja Jugoistocne Azije (JIA) koje se
prvenstveno duguju cinjenici da su sve ove zemlje kasnopridošlice na svetsko tržište.
Teorije privrednog razvoja su posvetile relativno malu pažnju izuzetnost...i azijskih NiZ. Najveci deo
rasprave se zamrzao na dva polarizovana stanovišta, onom koje primat daje tržištu, odnosno onom koje
primat daje državi.
Dinamicki proces razvoja ovih zemalja je analiziran putem sveobuhvatnog ispitivanja ekonomskih,
politickih, socijalnih i kulturoloških faktora. U tom smislu, obuhvaceni su: prvo, elementi cuda oko cijeg
doprinosa nema spora, kao što su: stvaranje Istocno/Jugoistocnih azijskih regionalnih svetskih sistema, pro
investiciona makroekonomska politika, politika otvorene industrijalizacije, akumulacija ljudskog kapitala,
pragmatizam u sprovodenju ekonomske politike, itd; drugo, faktori uspeha koji su ostali nespomenuti,
nedovoljno istraženi ili im nije dat dovoljan znacaj: americka hladnoratovska politika i trgovinski režim
Pax Americana, aktivnost kineske dijaspore, dinamican proces menjanja komparativnih prednost, itd.; i
konacno, komponente cuda oko cijeg doprinosa još uvek postoje kontroverze: tzv. japanski razvojni
kolonijalizam, developmentalisticka država, intervencije industrijske politike, (ne)ravnomerna distribucija
dohotka i bogatstva, visoke stope investicija i/ili ukupna faktorska produktivnost, spoljna trgovina, itd.
Do snažne ekspanzije trgovine, investicija i drugih ekonomskih veza u okviru regiona IA je došlo bez
formalnih regionalnih institucionalnih aranžmana koji su stimulisali integraciju u Evropi ili na Americkom
kontinentu. Regionalna ekonomska konfiguracija i proces hvatanja prikljucka u IA se cesto obeležavaju
obrascem gusaka u letu.
Azijska finansijska kriza je naizgled zadala fatalni udarac tvrdnjama o superiornosti državom vodenog
azijskog kapitalizma i ocekivanjima o azijskom veku. Za usporenje rasta i izvoza posle krize vecina
azijskih ekonomista krivi pre razlicite ciklicne, nego strukturne faktore. Medutim, usporenje otkriva
nekoliko strukturnih problema koji moraju biti rešeni ukoliko azijske NiZ žele da održe brz rast. S druge
strane, finansijska kriza nije dovela do negacije opšteg ekonomskog okvira ili razvoja regiona. Kriza ne
znaci da je azijsko cudo završeno.
Lekcije iz azijskog iskustva se ne mogu izvuci na mehanicki nacin. Uspeh azijskih NiZ može, delom, biti
povezan sa posebnim uslovima koji teško mogu da budu ponovljeni negde drugde. U bilo kom momentu
vremena svaka zemlja se suocava sa jedinstvenom situacijom koja zavisi od mnoštva faktora. Sve je teže
za kasnopridošlice da uhvate prikljucak zato što je svetska privreda postala kompleksnija i asimetricno
meduzavisna. Uspeh azijskih NiZ ne opovrgava tendenciju pogoršanja uslova za vecinu zemalja da uhvate
prikljucak sa RZ.
The rapid growth of Asian newly industrialized countries, known as the Asian economic miracle, raises
two questions: first, what factors have contributed to this growth, and second, whether other developing
countries can replicate the same policy to initiate equally rapid growth.
While everybody agrees that Asian NICs recorded spectacular growth, no one agrees why these countries
are quite suddenly and unexpectedly began to grow so quickly. In support of different views on the origin
of the economic miracle, a series of so-called stylized facts was developed. However, overall, there is
neither a simple nor a definitive answer.
There is agreement that there is no single Asian model of development. However, there are certainly
some similarities in the approaches to the development of Japan, East Asian countries and Southeast Asian
countries, which is primarily due to the fact that all these countries are latecomers in the world market.
Theories of economic development are devoted relativ...ely little attention to the exceptionality of Asian
NICs. Much of the discussion is polarized at two opposing viewpoints, one that gives primacy to the
Market, and one that gives primacy to the Government.
The dynamic process of development of these countries is analyzed through a comprehensive examination
of economic, political, social and cultural factors. Accordingly, the work includes: firstly, the elements of
miracle around whose contribution there is no dispute, such as: the creation of the East / South East Asian
regional world-systems, pro-investment macroeconomic policy, policy of open industrialization, human
capital accumulation, pragmatism in the implementation of economic policy, etc; secondly, the factors of
success that remain unmentioned, not fully investigated or without satisfactory importance: American
Cold War policy and trade regime Pax Americana, the activity of the Chinese diaspora, dynamic process
of changing comparative advantages, etc; and finally, components of miracle whose contributions are still
controversial: the so-called Japanese developmental colonialism, developmentalist state, industrial policy
interventions, (in)equal income and wealth distribution, high investment rates and / or total factor
productivity, foreign trade, etc.
The rapid expansion of trade, investment and other economic ties within the East Asia region is reached
with no formal regional institutional arrangements that stimulated integration in Europe or in the
Americas. Regional economic configuration and catching-up process of the East Asia are often depicted
by flying-wild-geese pattern.
The Asian financial crisis was seemingly a fatal blow to the claims of the superiority of state-led Asian
capitalism and expectations about the Asian century. For slowing growth and exports rates after the crisis,
most Asian economists rather blame various cyclical than structural factors. However, slowing reveals
several structural problems that must be solved if the Asian NICs want to maintain rapid growth. On the
other hand, the financial crisis did not lead to the negation of the general economic framework and
development of the region. The crisis does not mean that the Asian miracle is over.
Lessons from the Asian experience can not be drawn mechanically. The success of the Asian NICs may,
in part, be associated with particular conditions that can hardly be replicated elsewhere. At any moment in
time, each country is faced with a unique situation that depends on many factors. It’s getting harder for
latecomers to catch up because the world economy has become more complex and asymmetrically
interdependent. The success of the Asian NICs does not deny the tendency of worsening conditions for
most countries to catch up with the developed countries.