Brazil and South Korea: Two Tales of a Middle-Income Trap
The middle-income trap may well characterize the experience of Brazil and most of Latin America since the 1980s. Conversely, South Korea maintained its pace of evolution, reaching a high-income status.
Such divergence of economic growth can be related to their distinctive performances of domestic accumulation of technological and organizational capabilities. Their different approaches to global value chains and trade globalization reinforced such discrepancy in domestic accumulation processes.
It would be interesting to have a look at “CRONYISM” in these two countries: as I have seen it was present in both Korea and Brasil, but in Korea it was eliminated before elsewhere: some presidents have already been imprisoned… Do you have any analysis of this?
Miguel June 23, 2021
Very interesting content. I find the ideas very attractive most throughout the analysis, I am not sure that the Korean model can be accurately described as a very open economy. As with Japan, the other great example of development through strategic trade policy protecting and promoting the creation of large national champion conglomerates, the imports of products and the domestic distribution channels are also tightly controlled by the Keiretsu or the Chaebol, depending on the country. This means that they have an ultimate say on the products that are imported and offered domestically, and the prices at which they are offered to the consumer or the other companies.
This means there is a de facto closure of markets to foreigners that is not necessarily considered a non-tariff barrier since it is private and more of a practice than a rule. As such, it is important to consider that openness of the economy in these two cases is less than apparent, and therefore undermines your comparative analysis in that point.
Your argument around the sector specialisation and its causes and consequences relating to education is very interesting and stimulating. I find it particularly attractive, thank you.
This Post Has 4 Comments
Great Presentation
It would be interesting to have a look at “CRONYISM” in these two countries: as I have seen it was present in both Korea and Brasil, but in Korea it was eliminated before elsewhere: some presidents have already been imprisoned… Do you have any analysis of this?
Very interesting content. I find the ideas very attractive most throughout the analysis, I am not sure that the Korean model can be accurately described as a very open economy. As with Japan, the other great example of development through strategic trade policy protecting and promoting the creation of large national champion conglomerates, the imports of products and the domestic distribution channels are also tightly controlled by the Keiretsu or the Chaebol, depending on the country. This means that they have an ultimate say on the products that are imported and offered domestically, and the prices at which they are offered to the consumer or the other companies.
This means there is a de facto closure of markets to foreigners that is not necessarily considered a non-tariff barrier since it is private and more of a practice than a rule. As such, it is important to consider that openness of the economy in these two cases is less than apparent, and therefore undermines your comparative analysis in that point.
Your argument around the sector specialisation and its causes and consequences relating to education is very interesting and stimulating. I find it particularly attractive, thank you.
Still the levels of competition faced by domestic producers are quite different
Comments are closed.