As
most but not all of the East Asian economies struggle towards recovery from the
devastating financial shocks of the last two years, it is more and more clear
that the crises of 1997-98 signaled the end of the Asian miracle. That miracle,
a burst of economic growth and rising prosperity unprecedented since the
original industrial revolutions in North America and Europe more than a century
ago, transformed the world’s political and economic structure. In a generation
or less, a significant number of Asian economies moved from poverty to
affluence, from technological backwardness to sophisticated users of cutting
edge technologies, and from rural societies still tied to age-old agricultural
and seasonal rhythms to urban societies fully participating in all the cultural
storms and upheavals of the late twentieth century.
For
twenty years, East Asia’s rapid growth transfixed the world. Wealth rose,
inequality shrank, and East Asia’s share of world trade steadily grew. It
seemed that Asia had discovered the secrets of King Midas, the ancient Near
Eastern monarch who turned everything he touched to gold.
Many
observers described the region’s economies as a flock of geese sweeping across
the sky in a ‘V’-formation: Japan in the lead, with Taiwan, South Korea, Hong
Kong and Singapore close behind. Farther back-but flying very fast-were
Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, China and the Philippines. The other Asian
economies, it was widely believed, would follow the trail blazed by Japan and
other early developers, moving through light consumer assembly industries like
textiles, toys and cheap electronics, ultimately to build steel, automobile and
finally high tech and financial service industries.
Beyond
East Asia, developing country governments, international financial and
development institutions and western governments looked at East Asia’s success and
sought to duplicate it elsewhere. Policy guidance from all these sources
counseled developing countries to introduce reforms that would put them on the
path toward export oriented growth and allow ever greater numbers of geese to
follow Japan.
The collapse
of the bubble economy
Unfortunately
it now seems clear that export-oriented growth strategies, like the import
substitution strategies popular two and three decades ago, do not work forever.
The problems of Asia’s developing economies have many structural problems in
common with the collapse of Japan’s bubble economy a decade ago, and point to
deep flaws in what only recently looked like an answer to persistent problems
of underdevelopment and poverty.
Most
of the commentary on the economic problems of the export-oriented economies has
centered on financial system issues: lack of transparency in lending, lack of
effective oversight, government interference in credit allocation, failure to
hedge properly against currency risk, mismatches between short-term debts to
skittish foreigners and long-term loans to domestic borrowers, and failure to
properly assess credit risks at a time of speculation and over-investment.
All
of these things are true in varying degrees among the troubled economies, and
financial sector overhauls will be necessary before the region’s prospects can
decisively improve. Other developing countries would be wise to learn from
Asia’s example and monitor their financial sectors carefully to prevent the
excesses and errors that have so greatly exacerbated East Asia’s economic woes.
The end of
the magic of export
These
problems are complicated and solving them will be politically difficult and
economically expensive-but with sufficient determination they can and will be
solved. It is the non-financial obstacles to growth that cause the most concern
to those interested in a return to rapid growth in Asia and economic progress
in other developing countries. The chief problem here is that Asia’s basic
economic pattern-high levels of domestic savings and investment combining with
foreign investment (both direct and portfolio) poured into the creation of a
manufacturing sector designed to produce goods for export to developed market
economies-will not work as well in the future as it has in the recent past.
The
villain is no longer western protectionism, though that continues to be a
worry. The new problem is a combination of over capacity in the developing
world and structural change in the developed market economies that looks set to
reduce growth in demand for traded manufactured goods for decades to come.
Over
capacity among producers of manufactured goods is a serious problem across a
wide range of industries. State allocation of credit has greatly exacerbated
the problem in many export-oriented economies; new, policy driven investments
continued to be made in industries like automobiles and steel long after world
wide over capacity problems had developed. State directed credit allocation
succeeded in building industrial bases in many countries, but these countries
now face difficult and painful reforms and restructuring given that their
financial systems are now weak, while powerful political interests seek to
defend an unsustainable status quo.
The
problem with over capacity is more than a cyclical one. Fundamentally,
export-oriented manufacturing in developing countries cannot expand at rates
greater than overall growth in demand for such products. When only a handful of
economies, most of them in small countries, were pursuing export oriented
growth strategies, the size of foreign markets was not a constraint. That is no
longer true. When Taiwan’s trade surplus with the United States peaked in 1987,
it had reached $800 per capita-$800 of trade surplus for every man, woman and
child on the island. For the United States, this trade deficit-totaling $16
billion, was manageable.
If
mainland China were to achieve an $800 per capita trade surplus with the United
States, however, the US trade deficit with China would reach $988
billion-$3,000 for every person in the United States. If Indonesia, Pakistan,
India and Bangladesh follow the model, the US trade deficit with these
countries would reach $ 2.1 trillion.
This,
alas, is not possible and the implication is clear. Other countries cannot
expect to achieve the same level of benefit from exports as the early adopters
of export oriented growth strategies did. While exports will and should play
important roles in development strategies in the future, successful development
strategies in years to come will have to rely more on internal markets and on
south-south trade.
The
economic problem of excess capacity and therefore poor profitability for
developing producers of manufactured goods is likely to be with us for the long
term. It was once difficult to start up industrial production in developing
countries. Now both the hardware and software aspects of industrial migration
are well understood, and more and more countries are technically able to build
export platforms.
Structural
changes in the developed market economies will further limit the possibilities
for exports of manufactured goods. Populations in most rich countries are
stable or actually declining, reducing the prospects for economic growth
overall and especially for growth in demand for manufactured goods. As these
populations age, their consumption patterns change-away from traded
manufactured goods like new cars, and new stereos and computers and towards
non-traded services such as medical care.
Manufacturing
is out, services are in
Moreover
growth in the developed market economies has shifted decisively out of
manufacturing and into services. To understand how this works, look at food
consumption patterns in rich countries. Past a certain point, consumers don’t
increase their consumption of food as incomes increase. What happens is that
less of the food budget is spent on ingredients and more is spent on service:
preparation. People eat out more and eat at fancier restaurants. As they choose
more expensive foods-meat and fish instead of grain, exotic fruits and
vegetables rather than staples-some additional income is possible for farmers.
But most of the increase in spending goes for non-traded services: chefs,
busboys, sommeliers, valet parking attendants and waiters.
As
incomes continue to rise in advanced countries, consumers are likely to spend a
relatively smaller proportion of their incomes on manufactured goods and other
traded commodities, and more of their income on non-traded services. That is
bad news for developing countries generally, and poses particular problems for
countries whose growth strategies depend heavily on rapid increases in
manufactured exports to the industrial market economies. We are probably at the
beginning of a long term deterioration in the terms of trade for producers of
manufactured goods comparable in some ways to the decline in terms of trade for
commodity producers over the last century.
The governance challenge
At the same time, East
Asian countries and other rapid developers face new and difficult governance
problems. Economic development makes societies more complex and harder to
govern well. An urban industrial society is harder to govern than a rural and
agricultural one. Governments in East Asia and elsewhere today must cope with a
myriad of difficult problems-land use, urban management, environmental
protection, and so forth-which were less urgent and less complex only two
decades ago.
Effective
regulation of financial markets needs to be seen as part of this broader
governance challenge. Financial markets in rapidly developing economies are
more complicated than they used to be, they do more things, and they involve
more complex transactions and different classes of risk. With respect to
financial regulation as well as to other areas of the ‘new governance agenda’
of rapidly developing countries, the political obstacles for modernizers are
deeply rooted and quite difficult to overcome. Current institutions and
practices are deeply rooted in political power structures, and the resistance
to change is determined and resourceful.
All
this suggests that the developing exporters of manufactures face immense
challenges. Faced with stiff competition, tight goods markets and complex
governance issues, these countries need more than superficial reforms to get
back on a sustainable growth path. Fortunately, the entrepreneurial drive,
technical skills and pragmatic approach of East Asia’s rapidly developing
countries have found creative solutions to equally difficult problems in the
past and after a somewhat difficult and complex period of adjustment and
reform, East Asia is likely to emerge once again as one of the most dynamic
regions in the global economy. (Walter
Russell Mead is Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on
Foreign Relations and directs a Ford Foundation project at the Council on the
new global economy). Sumber: http://www
Penulis : Drs.Simon Arnolds Julian Jacob
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar
ORANMG PINTAR UNTUK TAMBAH PENGETAHUAN PASTI BACA BLOG 'ROTE PINTAR'. TERNYATA 15 NEGARA ASING JUGA SENANG MEMBACA BLOG 'ROTE PINTAR' TERIMA KASIG KEPADA SEMUA PEMBACA BLOG 'ROTE PINTAR' DIMANA SAJA, KAPAN SAJA DAN OLEG SIAPA SAJA. NAMUN SAYA MOHON MAAF KARENA DALAM BEBERAPA HALAMAN DARI TIAP JUDUL TERDAPAT SAMBUNGAN KATA YANG KURANG SEMPURNA PADA SISI PALING KANAN DARI SETIAP HALAM TIDAK BERSAMBUNG BAIK SUKU KATANYA, OLEH KARENA ADA TERDAPAT EROR DI KOMPUTER SAAT MEMASUKKAN DATANYA KE BLOG SEHINGGA SEDIKIT TERGANGGU, DAN SAYA SENDIRI BELUM BISA MENGATASI EROR TERSEBUT, SEHINGGA PARA PEMBACA HARAP MAKLUM, NAMUN DIHARAPKAN BISA DAPAT MEMAHAMI PENGERTIANNYA SECARA UTUH. SEKALI LAGI MOHON MAAF DAN TERIMA KASIH BUAT SEMUA PEMBACA BLOG ROTE PINTAR, KIRANYA DATA-DATA BARU TERUS MENAMBAH ISI BLOG ROTE PINTAR SELANJUTNYA. DARI SAYA : Drs.Simon Arnold Julian Jacob-- Alamat : Jln.Jambon I/414J- Rt.10 - Rw.03 - KRICAK - JATIMULYO - JOGJAKARTA--INDONESIA-- HP.082135680644 - Email : saj_jacob1940@yahoo.co.id.com BLOG ROTE PINTAR : sajjacob.blogspot.com TERIMA KASIH BUAT SEMUA.