Are the Geese Still Flying? Catch-Up Industrialization in a Changing International Economic Environment

Trade Dynamics in the East Asian Miracle: A Time Series Analysis of US–East Asia Commodity Trade, 1962–1992

“…These results are generally consistent with the view of Japan as the leader of the East Asian economies, particularly in trade with the world's advanced economies. It is also consistent with the view of Japan as head goose, whose dominance was a result of its ability to "invent and innovate" and eventually progress towards more capital intensive goods (for a more detailed explanation, see Kaur, 2009). …”

“…These results contrast sharply with those of Gagnon and Rose (1995), who find considerable persistence in the direction of net trade and, thus, evidence against the product cycle theory. would benefit greatly by accounting for these last two points, as the international landscape changed significantly with the rise of China and the increasing importance of trade fragmentation (e.g., Kaur, 2009 andAthukorala andYamashita, 2006). A new pattern of trade dynamics appears to be emerging, perhaps characterized by both more competition and more opportunities.…”

China, India, and Industrial Policy for Inclusive Growth

“…Noland (2007) reaches a conclusion about Japanese policy that is quite reminiscent of the World Bank position in its 1993 study. 10 These characterizations come from a debate between two economists with different views of industrial policy (Lin and Chang, 2009) 11 Justin Lin, in Lin and Chang (2009), suggests that the "flying-geese" metaphor used in the context of countries following others up the industrial ladder (Kaur, 2013) is also useful in a purely domestic context, with the "geese" being firms rather than countries.…”

“…International production networks, as well as retail-chain buyer-led networks, have become increasingly significant in international trade (e.g., Pack and Saggi, 2006;Kaur, 2013). These developments do not remove the conceptual basis for industrial policy: externalities and adjustment costs will still matter.…”

“…3 Kaur (2013) argues that, despite changes in the international economic environment from the time period of the catch-up industrialization of the Northeast Asian economies, the process still rests on sequential upgrading of comparative advantage to higher value-added activities. That paper mentions the need for public policy to enable this process and, following that line of reasoning, the current paper makes a case for industrial policy, with special reference to the two emerging global giants, China and India.…”