The optimal degree of competition and dynamic efficiency in Japan and Korea
Identifieur interne : 00B067 ( Main/Merge ); précédent : 00B066; suivant : 00B068The optimal degree of competition and dynamic efficiency in Japan and Korea
Auteurs : Alice H. Amsden [États-Unis] ; Ajit Singh [Royaume-Uni]Source :
- European Economic Review [ 0014-2921 ] ; 1994.
Descripteurs français
- Wicri :
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Administrative guidance, Aggregate concentration, Amsden, Antitrust, Antitrust bulletin, Antitrust enforcement, Antitrust laws, Apparent paradox, Business groups, Cambridge university press, Cartel, Competition policy, Competitive advantage, Concentration ratios, Conventional paradigm, Domestic competition, Dynamic efficiency, East asian development, Economic analysis, Economic development, Economic growth, Economic openness, Fair trade commission, Foreign competition, Game theoretic models, General trading company, High growth period, High rates, Industrial concentration, Industrial organisation, Industrial organization, Industrial policies, Industrial policy, International competitiveness, International trade, Japanese companies, Japanese economy, Japanese experience, Japanese firms, Japanese government, Korean automobile industry, Korean case, Korean government, Large firms, Largest manufacturing firms, Machine tools, Market competition, Maximum competition, Michael porter, Miracle years, Mit1, Oligopolistic rivalry, Optimal degree, Oxford university press, Performance standards, Plausible capitalism, Rapid growth, Singh, Small firms, Static allocative efficiency, Successful combination, Takashi hikino, Technical change, Technological progress, Trade policy, Uekusa, Unfettered competition, World bank, World development report.
- Teeft :
- Administrative guidance, Aggregate concentration, Amsden, Antitrust, Antitrust bulletin, Antitrust enforcement, Antitrust laws, Apparent paradox, Business groups, Cambridge university press, Cartel, Competition policy, Competitive advantage, Concentration ratios, Conventional paradigm, Domestic competition, Dynamic efficiency, East asian development, Economic analysis, Economic development, Economic growth, Economic openness, Fair trade commission, Foreign competition, Game theoretic models, General trading company, High growth period, High rates, Industrial concentration, Industrial organisation, Industrial organization, Industrial policies, Industrial policy, International competitiveness, International trade, Japanese companies, Japanese economy, Japanese experience, Japanese firms, Japanese government, Korean automobile industry, Korean case, Korean government, Large firms, Largest manufacturing firms, Machine tools, Market competition, Maximum competition, Michael porter, Miracle years, Mit1, Oligopolistic rivalry, Optimal degree, Oxford university press, Performance standards, Plausible capitalism, Rapid growth, Singh, Small firms, Static allocative efficiency, Successful combination, Takashi hikino, Technical change, Technological progress, Trade policy, Uekusa, Unfettered competition, World bank, World development report.
Abstract
Abstract: This paper is concerned with the neglected role of competition policy in East Asian development. Michael Porter considers Japan's development to have benefitted from intense competition among firms. By contrast. Caves and Uekusa criticize MITI's role in creating recession cartels and entry barriers, which are thought to have resulted in allocative inefficiency. This paper argues that competition policy in both Japan and Korea was oriented towards creating dynamic efficiency (the highest long term productivity growth rate). It did so by measures, operating at both the industry and firm level, which sometimes restricted competition and sometimes encouraged it.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/0014-2921(94)90130-9
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 003860
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 003860
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 004E87
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:725D104876F643D83E46AB3AFD99D81A94E3CB57Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>The optimal degree of competition and dynamic efficiency in Japan and Korea</title>
<author><name sortKey="Amsden, Alice H" sort="Amsden, Alice H" uniqKey="Amsden A" first="Alice H." last="Amsden">Alice H. Amsden</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Singh, Ajit" sort="Singh, Ajit" uniqKey="Singh A" first="Ajit" last="Singh">Ajit Singh</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:725D104876F643D83E46AB3AFD99D81A94E3CB57</idno>
<date when="1994" year="1994">1994</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1016/0014-2921(94)90130-9</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/725D104876F643D83E46AB3AFD99D81A94E3CB57/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">003860</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">003860</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">003860</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">004E87</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">004E87</idno>
<idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0014-2921:1994:Amsden A:the:optimal:degree</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">00B067</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">The optimal degree of competition and dynamic efficiency in Japan and Korea</title>
<author><name sortKey="Amsden, Alice H" sort="Amsden, Alice H" uniqKey="Amsden A" first="Alice H." last="Amsden">Alice H. Amsden</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country>
<wicri:regionArea>New School for Social Research, 66 West 12th St., New York, NY 10011</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="state">État de New York</region>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Singh, Ajit" sort="Singh, Ajit" uniqKey="Singh A" first="Ajit" last="Singh">Ajit Singh</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="4"><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge, Austin Robinson Building, Sidgwick Ave., Cambridge CB3 9DD</wicri:regionArea>
<orgName type="university">Université de Cambridge</orgName>
<placeName><settlement type="city">Cambridge</settlement>
<region type="country">Angleterre</region>
<region type="région" nuts="1">Angleterre de l'Est</region>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
<affiliation></affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j">European Economic Review</title>
<title level="j" type="abbrev">EER</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0014-2921</idno>
<imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher>
<date type="published" when="1994">1994</date>
<biblScope unit="volume">38</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">3–4</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="941">941</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="951">951</biblScope>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0014-2921</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0014-2921</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Administrative guidance</term>
<term>Aggregate concentration</term>
<term>Amsden</term>
<term>Antitrust</term>
<term>Antitrust bulletin</term>
<term>Antitrust enforcement</term>
<term>Antitrust laws</term>
<term>Apparent paradox</term>
<term>Business groups</term>
<term>Cambridge university press</term>
<term>Cartel</term>
<term>Competition policy</term>
<term>Competitive advantage</term>
<term>Concentration ratios</term>
<term>Conventional paradigm</term>
<term>Domestic competition</term>
<term>Dynamic efficiency</term>
<term>East asian development</term>
<term>Economic analysis</term>
<term>Economic development</term>
<term>Economic growth</term>
<term>Economic openness</term>
<term>Fair trade commission</term>
<term>Foreign competition</term>
<term>Game theoretic models</term>
<term>General trading company</term>
<term>High growth period</term>
<term>High rates</term>
<term>Industrial concentration</term>
<term>Industrial organisation</term>
<term>Industrial organization</term>
<term>Industrial policies</term>
<term>Industrial policy</term>
<term>International competitiveness</term>
<term>International trade</term>
<term>Japanese companies</term>
<term>Japanese economy</term>
<term>Japanese experience</term>
<term>Japanese firms</term>
<term>Japanese government</term>
<term>Korean automobile industry</term>
<term>Korean case</term>
<term>Korean government</term>
<term>Large firms</term>
<term>Largest manufacturing firms</term>
<term>Machine tools</term>
<term>Market competition</term>
<term>Maximum competition</term>
<term>Michael porter</term>
<term>Miracle years</term>
<term>Mit1</term>
<term>Oligopolistic rivalry</term>
<term>Optimal degree</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Performance standards</term>
<term>Plausible capitalism</term>
<term>Rapid growth</term>
<term>Singh</term>
<term>Small firms</term>
<term>Static allocative efficiency</term>
<term>Successful combination</term>
<term>Takashi hikino</term>
<term>Technical change</term>
<term>Technological progress</term>
<term>Trade policy</term>
<term>Uekusa</term>
<term>Unfettered competition</term>
<term>World bank</term>
<term>World development report</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Administrative guidance</term>
<term>Aggregate concentration</term>
<term>Amsden</term>
<term>Antitrust</term>
<term>Antitrust bulletin</term>
<term>Antitrust enforcement</term>
<term>Antitrust laws</term>
<term>Apparent paradox</term>
<term>Business groups</term>
<term>Cambridge university press</term>
<term>Cartel</term>
<term>Competition policy</term>
<term>Competitive advantage</term>
<term>Concentration ratios</term>
<term>Conventional paradigm</term>
<term>Domestic competition</term>
<term>Dynamic efficiency</term>
<term>East asian development</term>
<term>Economic analysis</term>
<term>Economic development</term>
<term>Economic growth</term>
<term>Economic openness</term>
<term>Fair trade commission</term>
<term>Foreign competition</term>
<term>Game theoretic models</term>
<term>General trading company</term>
<term>High growth period</term>
<term>High rates</term>
<term>Industrial concentration</term>
<term>Industrial organisation</term>
<term>Industrial organization</term>
<term>Industrial policies</term>
<term>Industrial policy</term>
<term>International competitiveness</term>
<term>International trade</term>
<term>Japanese companies</term>
<term>Japanese economy</term>
<term>Japanese experience</term>
<term>Japanese firms</term>
<term>Japanese government</term>
<term>Korean automobile industry</term>
<term>Korean case</term>
<term>Korean government</term>
<term>Large firms</term>
<term>Largest manufacturing firms</term>
<term>Machine tools</term>
<term>Market competition</term>
<term>Maximum competition</term>
<term>Michael porter</term>
<term>Miracle years</term>
<term>Mit1</term>
<term>Oligopolistic rivalry</term>
<term>Optimal degree</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Performance standards</term>
<term>Plausible capitalism</term>
<term>Rapid growth</term>
<term>Singh</term>
<term>Small firms</term>
<term>Static allocative efficiency</term>
<term>Successful combination</term>
<term>Takashi hikino</term>
<term>Technical change</term>
<term>Technological progress</term>
<term>Trade policy</term>
<term>Uekusa</term>
<term>Unfettered competition</term>
<term>World bank</term>
<term>World development report</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Cartel</term>
<term>Politique de la concurrence</term>
<term>Analyse économique</term>
<term>Développement économique</term>
<term>Croissance économique</term>
<term>Concentration industrielle</term>
<term>Politique industrielle</term>
<term>Commerce international</term>
<term>Politique commerciale</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Abstract: This paper is concerned with the neglected role of competition policy in East Asian development. Michael Porter considers Japan's development to have benefitted from intense competition among firms. By contrast. Caves and Uekusa criticize MITI's role in creating recession cartels and entry barriers, which are thought to have resulted in allocative inefficiency. This paper argues that competition policy in both Japan and Korea was oriented towards creating dynamic efficiency (the highest long term productivity growth rate). It did so by measures, operating at both the industry and firm level, which sometimes restricted competition and sometimes encouraged it.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Main/Merge
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 00B067 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Merge/biblio.hfd -nk 00B067 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= Main |étape= Merge |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:725D104876F643D83E46AB3AFD99D81A94E3CB57 |texte= The optimal degree of competition and dynamic efficiency in Japan and Korea }}
This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |