Introduction
The study on economic development can be traced back in the earliest at the end of the Second World War were the respective academics and policy developers are largely debated the essence role of the public policy of some of the developing economies. It is evident based on the economic progress and the percentage of growth that the respective nations on Asia have recorded since that period. East Asia is one of the regions where the respective nations have recorded a one of the world economies and were being able to sustain economic growth and development. Menom, (2004) not only term the current growth as a model, but a miraculous growth as attributed by some of the 8 high performing Asian economies (HPAEs). This included Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Japan, and Taiwan and the 3 newly industrializing economies (NIEs) of Southeast Asia including Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. Based on a mere preview on the two regions economic developments, it is evident that the East Asian economies provide a range of policy frameworks that extend through Hong Kong. This ideally embraces a complete laissez faire to the highly selective policy regimes enacted in Japan and Korea (Hill and Menon 2014). Asian Economic model of development embraces respective policies that are aimed at coexistence of the activists as reflected on their public policies development. This also include the rapid growth in some of the East Asian economies with Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan having raised some more complex and controversial questions based on the relationship between the governments, the private sectors and the market in general. The notion on whether there is an Asian model of development is established during the study as a detailed analysis on some of the regions and the respective economies develop policies and aspects in relation to their economic development.
On the other hand, 10 states of the Southeast Asia have integrated their efforts towards forming some of the world’s most developing, successful and durable in relation to the regional grouping. This involves the formation of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This involves the economic integration established between them which are high and increasing daily. The high ambitions presented by the ASEAN region on Economic Community is scheduled to take marginal effect from December 2015 that are further aimed at accelerating the integration. This involves the diversity and the wide plus broad entities that are encompassed under the integration on social, economic and institutional entity. In this perspective, the study seeks to examine whether there is a “Southeast Asia development model” (Menon 2014). As per the diversity of the respective nations, such a model may not be in existence as the study seeks to explore. However, over time it is evident that these countries are converging with respect to their openness based on their macroeconomic management and some of the respective aspects presented under the social policy. One of the most intriguing entities in relation to the region is based on the evident analogy depicting that some of the poorer countries are growing faster that the richer ones hence suggesting gradual convergence. Another entity as an example in the study is defined by some of the essential spillover and demonstration effects which are evident from some of the region’s leaders to the followers. The intriguing notion on whether such developments are likely to lead to the adoption of coherent regional development strategies is therefore defined. There are entities that are embedded under such developments in the respective regions. The study aims at examining some of these aspects towards availing a more conclusive notion on whether such models exists and the diversity attached to the respective nations which are likely to deter the development of such economic development.
The proffered analysis depicts some of the notions and the analogies that have been developed based on the respective regions economic development. The most intriguing analogy that the study seeks to examine through a detailed conceptual framework is on whether there is an Asia economic development model. The development project includes a detailed analysis on the respective regions nations including Southeast Asia and the East Asia nations and examining the economic policies and the controversies attached. The diversity in relation to the two regions is analyzed towards presenting a clear insight on whether it may be attached to the failure to the formation of the model, or it can be an attributing factor towards the formation. Such entities include the study where the respective approaches are developed hence examining the essential entities in regard to the policy formation and economic management among other political and social aspects. The preceding analysis avails a theoretical approach which is aimed at embracing and examining Asian economic model. However it also provides a critical analysis of a detailed comparison on the Southeast Asia and the East Asia economies and the policies towards establishing specific distinguishing factors. In a nutshell, these nations can be grouped together and distinguished from others. The levels of political and development models examine the controversies over some of the sources of economic growth plus discussing some the public policies in the two regions. These are essential in relation to the conformation of the conventional wisdom relating to good development policy among other entities in relation to economic development and changes in relation to the respective regions. Furthermore, this is essential towards establishing some of the vital aspects relating to the diversity of the nations that fit the pattern established within the region by the respective nations.
Analysis
The factor is established on the availed analogy that integrates the respective entities embedded under the respective regions. The preceding analysis seeks to incorporate a detailed insight on the two regions through a developing a conceptual framework on the two nations under each of the respective region. The process is attained through comparing two countries from East Asia (China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan) from Southeast Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Philippines). This involves examining the respective trends and the patterns that the respective nations have created while also examining the diversity and other policies that have been developed within the region.
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) this association that is termed as the most durable and effective regional economic and political grouping in the developing world traces the roots for over 47 years ago Menon (2013). The association was driven by the 1992 introduction of the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) where the process of regional economic integration is anticipated to accelerate further from the late 2015 as the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) protocols are projected to take effect (Severino & Menon 2013). Such notion on development raises the intriguing question on whether it can yield the “Southeast Asia development model”. One of the most essential entities that is worth understanding in relation to drawing a definite conclusion on the formation of the model based on the need to understand the meaning of the word model in a broader sense. Model in a broad sense refers to the development strategy or the economic philosophy which guides the economic policy making. Some of the examples of the models are the “Soviet Model” of central planning, agricultural collectivization and the heavy industry plus the “Maoist model” that emphasizes on a revolutionary approach to the economic development in low income economy. There are other forms of models that have been developed by the respective nations aimed at amassing the respective gains that are normally attached.
The most intriguing entity relate to the leading 10 nations within the region that is characterized by diversity questioning the formation of a common development model. This involves the respective nations within the region share varying diversity aspects that question the formation of such a model within the region and Asia in general. For instance, Singapore is the richest within the region recording per capita income of over fifty times of the poor mainland states. On the other hand, Indonesia avails over 40 times the population of Singapore and Laos. Some of the other intriguing entity involves the regions’ business cycles and the economic drivers which vary widely. Another aspect is the colonial and the post independence histories which are differing based on the events and the occurrences that unfolded during the period. For instance, in the 1960s Southeast Asia has been under what can be termed as the “region in revolt” with some of the researchers terming it as the dominoes, vulnerable to the downward thrust of communist China and to the “Beijing-Pyongyang-Hanoi-Phnom Penh-Jakarta axis” (Severino 2013). It is apparent that, there used to exist hostility within the region in addition to the Indo China War. Singapore and Malaysia split in the 1965 after just a brief union with Indonesia threatened by Konfrontasi against the newly developed or formed state of Malaysia in the mid 1960s (Menon 2013).
The preceding analysis seeks to avail a brief review on the Southeast Asia two nations based on their economic models. This will also involve developing a detailed comparison on these nations with those in the East region.
Singapore and Taiwan
As proffered in the preceding analysis, it is evident that this is the richest nation within the region based on the fact that, the region has the highest per capita income compared to others. Based on the current survey, the nations’ per capita income is over fifty times of the poor mainland states. The country’s economy has extreme international orientation which is based on the manufacturing and service exports, premised on the extensive government intervention and planning plus essential direct enterprise ownership through the holding companies such as Temasek, but not through central planning. The country not only advocates on the markets as the central tool for allocating the resources but also considerate interventions to guide these market outcomes, in the labor markets, urban planning and congestion plus the capital markets being some of the entities attached. The governments have been highly interventionist in the proffered areas among others that are a differing notion compared to the conventional neoclassical interpretation of the country’s record. The nation has deep commercial ties with Malaysia with the latest survey indicating other nations such as Vietnam seeking to be growing fast. Under macroeconomic management, avails two apparent cases under the region with nations such as Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand having an inflation rate low or less than 10 percent compared to 955 observations within the region. However policies have developed within the region hence containing the situation with the inflation returning to less than ten percent within a year or two within the region. Furthermore, Singapore falls under the eight high performing Asian economies (HPAEs) such as Japan, Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Taiwan plus the three newly industrializing economies (NIEs) from Southeast Asia including Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand (Hill & Menon 2012).
On the other hand, Vietnam is one of the fastest growing compared to the three Indo China latecomers under the East region. The occurrences involve the nation’ experienced growth which is at extremely low levels of per capita income and was less affected by the Asian Financial Crises (AFC). The nation has embraced such low per capita income to increase the production in very sector ranging from agriculture to manufacturing. These factors have enabled the country to be among the fastest growing nations that may dominate the region despite the previous historical trends and challenges that affected the nation. Such diversity in relation to the two nations that are; Singapore and Vietnam raise an intriguing question on whether they can allow effective formation of an economic model within the region and Asia in general.
Based on the proffered analysis on the Southeast countries such as Singapore and Vietnam as availed in the proffered analysis, they depict that there is no Southeast model though, with the current trends and developments, it is applicable that such a model is formed in the future. The diversity in relation to the areas of development, economy and other aspects are some of the limiting factors towards establishing such a model. The factors in relation to some of the differences that exist within the region are likely to limit the formation of the model within the Southeast region and Asian region in general. The comparison between Vietnam and Indo China latecomers depicts how Vietnam is the fastest in growth hence intriguing aspect, about the formation of a model under the entire region.
East Asia Region
China is one of the leading nations with current statistics indicating the potential of the nation being superpower and overtaking USA in the next few years. The technique proffers the essence of analysing China under this category about establishing a clear insight on the region formation of a model under what the researcher’s terms as the miraculous development policy.
China and Japan
In the previous year’s such as 2007 or 2008 researchers projected that China rising was more likely to follow the historical trend where emergence of new poles of power international systems were witnessed by geopolitically destabilizing caused by the respective powers (Christopher, 2008). The evidence is based on the fact that the rise of United States, Japan and Germany at the end of the nineteenth century largely contributed to the international political frictions which later accumulated in two world wars. The notion behind such analogies was attached to the claim that China would likely follow the suit though Beijing claimed that China will undergo a “peaceful rise”, this has been evident in the last few years. The aspect is based on the fact that despite the increasing rise of China economically, technological advantages, and military power there has been no confrontation with other nations such as America as predicted. Though this is evident future events or occurrences in relation to China rise and the international impact is still unpredictable based on the sensitivity of the attached aspects and issues by the involved powers.
The rise of China to a Great Power occurred in a gradual manner increasing tremendously in the last few years. From the analysis it is established that from 1980s to the late 1990s China economy was able to maintain an approximate of 10 percent each year. Later in the late 1990s until 2005 the nation economy grew at 8 percent to 9 percent annually. By 2006, China’s annual economy rate was projected to have been grown by 11 percent with the successive year’s also recording recommendable percentage (Christopher, 2008). The phenomenal economic growth of China is the major propelling factor towards the emergence of the nation as a great power which according to researchers is a familiar pattern in international politics with projections of the nation being a threat to United States or other nations attached to the notion. The notion on threat is further supplemented by the historical analogies and trends created by the rising powers. Economic growth of some states normally grows at different rates, where some states gains more power and others lose the power relative to others. This notion is demonstrated by some of the writers such as Paul Kennedy who through this 1987 book The Rise and Fall of Great Powers indicated that tome and gaining of powers are relative to the economic shifts. This indicates that they are more likely to create or give rise of new great powers which one day would have a decisive impact on the military or the territorial order (Minxin 2002). The rise of China to the Great nation and Japan depicts some of the vital entities in relation to the region’s growth and the world’s economies.
Diversity of the nations fit into the pattern
The region has highly diverse group of economies which are differing on the natural resources, population, culture, and economic policies. The region also has some of the rapid developing economies and has also been able to sustain growth for a period of time. Some of the nations under this entity are some of the world’s leading economy. The diversity on the region in relation to the formation of an Asian Model are; their histories, economic, living standards, political systems, resource endowments plus institutions. The technique depicts little or no sense to advance the proposition of the existence of “Asian model of development. However some of the arguable similarities that can be realized beyond the obvious geographical proximity avails a promising glimpse formation of such a model. The increasing integration on economic and political entities is some of the aspects that define the formation of such a model. Based on the availed analysis, the regional networks which have not yet formed models that is either the East or Southeast Asia depict the complexity on the formation of such models.
References
- Christopher Layne (2008). China’s Challenge to Us Hegemony, Global Trends
- Minxin Pei ,(2002) “China’s Governance Crisis”, Foreign Affairs, Sep/Oct, 2002 pp.96-109, p97
- Severino, R. and J. Menon (2013), ‘The ASEAN Community: An Overview’, in S. Basu, J. Menon, R. Severino and O. Shresta (eds), The ASEAN Economic Commu-nity: A Work in Progress, Asian Development Bank, Manila, and the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, forthcoming.
- Warr, P. (2006), ‘Poverty and Growth in Southeast Asia’, ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 23 (3), pp. 279-302.
- Hill, H. and J. Menon (2012), ‘ASEAN Economic Integration: Driven by Markets, Bu-reaucrats or Both?’, in M. Kreinin and M. Plummer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Commercial Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 357-386.
- Hill, H. and J. Menon (2014), ‘Does East Asia have a Working Financial Safety Net?’, Asian Economic Journal, forthcoming.
- Jones, G.W. (2013), ‘The Population of Southeast Asia’, Working Paper Series No. 196, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
