Protectionism and industrialization: a critical assessment of the Latin American industrialization period

Abstract

Protectionist policies were considered one of the pivotal features of the import industrialization process in Latin America. In this paper the effects of protectionist policies are assessed in terms of the principal macroeconomic variables, productive structure and external trade composition; also, ECLAC's perspective on the import substitution process is discussed. The main conclusions are that regional protectionist policies were spontaneous, and their effects were limited due to the generalized protection that took place and the government's commitment to price stability.

Rethinking Varieties of Capitalism from the Latin American Periphery

“…The historical constitution of local capitalist sectors—strongly concentrated, associated with static comparative advantages in natural resources, averse to risk, and alien to innovation—did not undergo substantial modifications during the ISI period, but rather came to form its limiting social basis. Thus, most national ISI strategies pursued up until the 1970s at one point or another lapsed into a kind of “frivolous protectionism,” favoring both local and foreign companies, but not the development of innovative productive structures (Fajnzylber 1983; Levy-Orlik 2009). Attempts at confronting the resulting problems in advancing to the more complex phases of import substitution through the promotion of the influx of transnational capital tended to intensify the problematic socio-productive heterogeneity even more, without significantly contributing to advancing the dynamism or the complexity of local accumulation processes (Amsden 2001, 2007; Sunkel 1970).…”

Variedades Y Variaciones De Capitalismo en La Periferia. América Latina Y El Este Asiático Reconsiderados

“…La forma fuertemente concentrada de los actores capitalistas locales, aferrada a las ventajas comparativas de los recursos naturales y ajena al riesgo y la innovación, no sufrió alteraciones sino que constituyó la base -limitante-durante la estrategia de sustitución de importaciones desarrollada muy tempranamente en la región. De hecho, como advierten Fajnzylber (1983Fajnzylber ( , 1987 y Levy-Orlik (2009), la mayoría de las estrategias de industrialización sustitutiva de importaciones que se persiguieron hasta los años setenta se convirtieron en una especie de proteccionismo generalizado 7 y frívolo que favorecía a compañías tanto locales como extranjeras, pero no al desarrollo de una estructura productiva innovadora. El intento de enfrentar los problemas asociados a avanzar sobre la sustitución de las fases más complejas de la industrialización mediante la promoción de la afluencia de capital transnacional, en general, intensificó la heterogeneidad socio-productiva sin contribuir significativamente al dinamismo o la complejidad de los procesos de acumulación locales a partir de procesos de aprendizajes endógenos (Véase Amsden, 2001;y Sunkel, 1971).…”

Open Regionalism and the Pacific Alliance: The Case of the sura Group as a Private Sector Actor

“…Thus, the isi model may be understood as an attempt to reduce foreign economic dependency by increasing internal production of 9 However, some authors argue the ecLac was not the origin of the isi policies. According to Levy-Orlik (2009), for instance, "it can be said that the protectionist policies were not part of ecLac recommendations. To the contrary they resulted from internal and external conditions, especially political in nature that dominated the Latin American region after the Second World War" (p. 448).…”

“…Because of these events, governments in the region decided to reduce tariffs and open up to international trade. In addition, some evident problems associated with protectionism during its final stages in the region were noted by Levy-Orlik (2009):…”