Dilemas do desenvolvimento na China: crescimento acelerado e disparidades regionais (da Revolução Comunista à globalização)
Because China´s outstanding economic performance in the last three decades is seenas an imitative experience for the whole developing countries, this paper aims tobring evidences on the fact that Chinese-style economic success can not be appliedinstantaneously for other countries. The lines presented here can be used as a warningfor Brazilian policy-makers not to abandon the idea that government intervention ?like many liberal thinkers had predicted widespread recently ? is always harmful forthe economy. In fact, the opposite has been proved more beneficial with publicaction more intensely required in these present days of economic globalization.China´s state intervention in the production factors (capital, investment and labor)has been steady and decisive to achieve the observed growth rates as well as goingahead with the modernization of economic structures. Meanwhile, there have beenundesirable results concerned with increasing regional inequalities. The creation ofspecial economic zones (SEZ´s) to attract foreign investment to coastal areas resultedin strong concentration of industrial plants in the coastal region widening regionalper capita income gaps.
Introduction to the Symposium: Greater China and the World Economy
China, the sleeping dragon, is no longer sleeping. Since opening its door to the rest of the world at the end of the 1970’s, China has undergone widespread and drastic changes, which no one could have foreseen. These changes have been responsible for China’s prolonged economic growth. Column 2 of Table 1 presents annual growth rates from 1970 to 2000. In early 1970, China was recovering from the Cultural Revolution, so economic development began from a fairly low base. Growth in the first decade was somewhat erratic, ranging from a low of —2.68% in 1976 to a high of 16.19% in 1970. Beginning in the early 1980’s, a series of domestic changes accompanied by trade and investment liberalization policies promoted high growth rates. Starting from 1982, with the exception of only two years, China did not have an annual growth rate lower than 7%. In fact, in one-half of the 18 years from 1982 to 2000, China was able to grow at rates higher than 10%. Such long periods of high growth rates were unprecedented and propelled China into a position of importance in the world economy.
Complexity, Network-Decisions And Alternative Risk Premia: Some New Theories Of Structural Change And Portfolio Decisions.
Structural Change is the basis for many decisions such as government fiscal and monetary policies, government interventions, corporate-expenditure decisions, corporate strategic decisions, portfolio management decisions in finance; household allocation decisions, etc.. Structural change in industries and national economies is increasingly more difficult to detect partly because of the growth and dominance of Complex Systems and “Networks” in modern industries and economies – such Networks and Complex Systems include GVCs (global value chains), retail store networks; franchising networks; internet networks; services networks; credit-chains in industries; online social networks; etc.. The relationship between Complexity and Structural Change is well established in the physics, applied math and economic dynamics literatures. Traditional definitions and modeling of structural change have erroneously focused on changes in labor, technological progress, market share, and or capital – which are grossly inadequate in the new economy and post- global financial crisis (as confirmed by changes in the global retailing and housing industries and other industries). Also the modeling of structural change seems to be constrained by the availability of data, and often omits the relationship between structural change on one hand, and globalization, financial stability and international financial contagion. This article: i) introduces the Operations Strategy Model of structural change, explains how it differs from the Lewis Model of Structural Change; and explains the often omitted relationship between operations strategy (of companies and government agencies) and structural change; ii) introduces other new Complexity-based models/theories of Structural Change in industries; iii) reviews the relationships among Operations Research, Complexity and Structural Change; iv) explains the symbiotic relationship between structural change on one hand, and economic growth, financial stability, financial contagion and globalization; v) discusses the significant gap between academic research and practice and explains some issues and factors that should be considered in the development and testing of structural change models; vi) explains how alternative risk premia can be generated from new models of Structural Change.