These essays are a product of a co-operative research project between American and Taiwanese social scientists. Of particular interest is the chapter discussing a comparative study of industrial policy, productivity growth and structural change in manufacturing.

The rapid growth of Taiwan's postwar miracle economy is most frequently credited to the leading role of the state in promoting economic development. Megan Greene challenges this standard interpretation in the first in-depth examination of the origins of Taiwan's developmental state. Greene examines the ways in which the Guomindang state planned and promoted scientific and technical development both in mainland China between 1927 and 1949 and on Taiwan after 1949. Using industrial science policy as a lens, she shows that the state, even during its most authoritarian periods, did not function as a monolithic entity. State planners were concerned with maximizing the use of Taiwan's limited resources for industrial development. Political leaders, on the other hand, were most concerned with the state's political survival. The developmental state emerged gradually as a result of the combined efforts of technocrats and outsiders, including academicians and foreign advisors. Only when the political leadership put its authority and weight behind the vision of these early planners did Taiwan's developmental state fully come into being. In Taiwan's combination of technocratic expertise and political authoritarianism lie implications for our understanding of changes taking place in mainland China today.

Taiwan's Development Experience: Lessons on Roles of Government and Market scrutinizes the main features of the Taiwanese development experience under five interrelated themes and domains: Outward-orientation vs. inward-orientation; Sources of growth; Dynamic balanced growth process: the interaction between agricultural and non-agricultural sectors; The role of government in the transition to a more market-oriented economy; and The potential transferability of the Taiwanese development experience to developing countries. In addition to highlighting the essential contributions of papers, the Editors also bring out the views and contributions, under each of the above headings, of two distinguished former Cornell University colleagues who are honored at the sponsoring conference - T.C. Liu and S.C. Tsiang.

This collection of papers challenges the conventional view of East Asian development driven by open and efficient markets and suggests that considerable diversity both at the institutional level and in policy approaches lies behind the region's rapid economic growth.

This study provides an analysis of the role the United States alliance with Nationalist China played in US strategy to contain first the Sino-Soviet alliance and then China during the 1950s and 1960s.

Industrialization supported by industrial hubs has been widely associated with structural transformation and catch-up. But while the direct economic benefits of industrial hubs are significant, their value lies first and foremost in their contribution as incubators of industrialization, production and technological capability, and innovation. The Oxford Handbook of Industrial Hubs and Economic Development adopts an interdisciplinary approach to examine the conceptual underpinnings, review empirical evidence of regions and economies, and extract pertinent lessons for policy reasearchers and practitioners on the key drivers of success and failure for industrial hubs. This Handbook illustrates the diverse and complex nature of industrial hubs and shows how they promote industrialization, economic structural transformation, and technological catch-up. It explores the implications of emerging issues and trends such as environmental protection and sustainability, technological advancement, shifts in the global economy, and urbanization.

This book explores the variations in the transformation of the Asian developmental state in South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Based on an original theory, the author argues that these variations are influenced by two factors: industrial structure and democratic transition, both of which are shaped by the strategic calculations of the ruling elites to maintain power. The theory concerns two concurrent political processes during the state’s development process, namely the emergence of economic interest groups with varying levels of policy constraints on the state; and the process of democratic transition driven by the rise of the middle class. The book will appeal to students and researchers in the fields of Asian politics, development studies, political economy and comparative politics.

Long run processes of socio-economic change generate prodigious problems of social conflict and social control, and governments responsible for these processes must therefore manage the resultant conflict. Consequently, the success or failure of a government's management of such conflicts is a crucial factor in development outcomes. This volume investigates the political struggle for development specifically in two vital regions - East Asia and Latin America. This analysis calls into question the dominant emphasis on institutional and cultural bases for stable growth. A careful historical account of the two regions is presented, which permits the rigorous testing of conventional wisdoms regarding development. Of importance to a broad range of academics in the spheres of development studies, politics, political economy and sociology, this book will also make an interesting read for those with a general interest in these areas.

This book looks at developmental pathways to poverty reduction that emphasize employment-centred structural change, social policies that both protect citizens and contribute to economic development, and types of politics that support economic transformation and participation of the poor in growth processes.

This book argues that the concepts of ‘neoliberalism’ and ‘neoliberalisation,’ while in common use across the whole range of social sciences, have thus far been generally overlooked in planning theory and the analysis of planning practice. Offering insights from papers presented during a conference session at a meeting of the Association of American Geographers in Boston in 2008 and a number of commissioned chapters, this book fills this significant hiatus in the study of planning. What the case studies from Africa, Asia, North-America and Europe included in this volume have in common is that they all reveal the uneasy cohabitation of ‘planning’ – some kind of state intervention for the betterment of our built and natural environment – and ‘neoliberalism’ – a belief in the superiority of market mechanisms to organize land use and the inferiority of its opposite, state intervention. Planning, if anything, may be seen as being in direct contrast to neoliberalism, as something that should be rolled back or even annihilated through neoliberal practice. To combine ‘neoliberal’ and ‘planning’ in one phrase then seems awkward at best, and an outright oxymoron at worst. To admit to the very existence or epistemological possibility of ‘neoliberal planning’ may appear to be a total surrender of state planning to market superiority, or in other words, the simple acceptance that the management of buildings, transport infrastructure, parks, conservation areas etc. beyond the profit principle has reached its limits in the 21st century. Planning in this case would be reduced to a mere facilitator of ‘market forces’ in the city, be it gentle or authoritarian. Yet in spite of these contradictions and outright impossibilities, planners operate within, contribute to, resist or temper an increasingly neoliberal mode of producing spaces and places, or the revival of profit-driven changes in land use. It is this contradiction between the serving of private profit-seeking interests while actually seeking the public betterment of cities that this volume has sought to describe, explore, analyze and make sense of through a set of case studies covering a wide range of planning issues in various countries. This book lays bare just how spatial planning functions in an age of market triumphalism, how planners respond to the overruling profit principle in land allocation and what is left of non-profit driven developments.