Suchergebnisse

The theoretical case for industrial policy is a strong one. The market failures that industrial policies target in markets for credit, labor, products, and knowledge have long been at the core of what development economists study. The conventional case against industrial policy rests on practical difficulties with its implementation. Even though the issues could in principle be settled by empirical evidence, the evidence to date remains uninformative. Moreover, the conceptual difficulties involved in statistical inference in this area are so great that it is hard to see how statistical evidence could ever yield a convincing verdict. A review of industrial policy in three non-Asian settings El Salvador, Uruguay, and South Africa highlights the extensive amount of industrial policy that is already being carried out and frames the need for industrial policy in the specific circumstances of individual countries. The traditional informational and bureaucratic constraints on the exercise of industrial policy are not givens; they can be molded and rendered less binding through appropriate institutional design. Three key design attributes that industrial policy must possess are embeddedness, carrots-and-sticks, and accountability.

Theoretical analyses of industrial policy normally restrict the range of possible outcomes by abstracting from either market or government failures. This paper thus studies industrial policy and its effectiveness in a model that includes both market and government imperfections. We introduce a public agency responsible for industrial policy into the model of Hausmann and Rodrik (2003), and assume that this agency has limited information and is partly politically motivated. We further extend the model to allow the public agency to communicate with en- trepreneurs and the entrepreneurs to engage in rent seeking. We find that industrial policies are ineffective if the public agency is poorly informed, but that they are not necessarily ineffective if the public agency is highly politically motivated. Given a highly politically mo- tivated public agency, industrial policies are effective if and only if the institutional setting ensures that such policies are modest e.g. by re- stricting the public agency?s budget. Moreover, our model helps us to understand why the same industrial policies that have failed elsewhere have been relatively successful in South Korea and Taiwan.

This article examines some theoretical approaches in support of industrial policy in Brazil, with special emphasis on the neo-Schumpeterian/evolutionary approach. This approach is applied to the analysis of some satisfactory experiences in the field of industrial policy and economic development in Brazil up to the end of the 1970s, and some unsuccessful attempts in this field from the 1980s on. Lastly, it evaluates the industrial policy applied by the government in the 2003- 2006 period, noting that, in spite of some positive aspects -the emphasis on innovation, clear goals and a new institutional organization- that policy has some weak points, such as its incompatibility with macroeconomic policy, lack of coherence between economic instruments, shortcomings in infrastructure and in the science, technology and innovation system, and lack of coordination and political will. (CEPAL Rev/GIGA)

The differences registered in the early 90s between the economy of the European Union as compared to the economies of the United States and Japan, in regards of growth rates, investment rates, R&D and innovation, international trade, etc., as well as the fast changes of the world economy determined the European Commission to issue the white paper on "Growth, Competitiveness and Employment", underlining the meaning of the European economy's competitiveness in the new conditions, and the legal frame for EU's industrial policy was settled through the Treaty of Maastricht. The document was setting theobjectives, priorities and the six basic principles of the European industrial policy, in a unitary concept. In the spring of 2000, the European Council from Lisbon sets the objective of transforming the European Union in the most dynamic and competitive economy of the world, and, therefore, foresees a working agenda with specific actions going until the horizon of 2009. In December 2002, after EUs enlargement, the Commission forwards to the Council the document titled "Industrial Policy in an Enlarged Europe", in which theindustrial development at the moment of new member states integration is analyzed, as well as the effects of EU's enlargement over the industry, and it suggests actions for the future development of the sector. The industrial policy of the EU must offer solutions for industrial development, by answering the challenges concerning globalization, the technological and organizational changes, the increasing role of innovation and entrepreneurship, and the sustainable development taking into consideration the new socialrequirements. The development objectives set at European level cannot be reached without a tight interconnection of the industrial policy measures with those of some complementary policies, such as thecommercial policy, the single market policy, transport and energy policies, research and development policies, competition policy, regional and macroeconomic policies.

Introduction / Keith Cowling -- A reorientation of industrial policy? Horizontal policies and targeting / Keith Cowling, Christine Oughton and Roger Sugden -- Sustainable regional development: new dimensions in policy formulation / Gerry Sweeney -- The territorial challenge to innovation and endogenous regional development / Bjørn T. Asheim -- Europe's advantage? Work organisation, innovation and employment / Peter Totterdill -- The competitive disadvantage of England / Simon Lee -- The activation of bottom-up methodologies in a newly opened regional economy: an experience in the Oeste region of Santa Catarina, Brazil / Silvano Bertini and Gian Luca Baldoni -- The entrepreneurial society in practice / Marc Cowling -- Practical issues of networking and co-operation / Jacques de Bandt -- Making small firms work: policy dimensions and the Scottish context / Gavin C. Reid -- Industrial policy implications of competition policy failure in mergers / Hans Schenk -- Public policy and the development of the informal venture capital market: UK experience and lessons for Europe / Colin M. Mason and Richard T. Harrison -- The liability of small-scale investment: a simulation model of the performance of an early stage, technology-focused, venture capital fund / Gordon Murray and Richard Marriott -- Universal service, universal access and the Internet / Jonathan Cave -- Market structure, corporate objectives and cost efficiency / Johan Willner -- Regulating transnationals: free markets and monitoring in Europe / David Bailey, George Harte and Roger Sugden -- Industrial strategy in the era of transnationals: analysis and policy issues / Grazia Ietto-Gillies -- Multinational enterprise investment and industrial policy / Cormac K. Hollingsworth -- The macroeconomics of industrial strategy / Philip Arestis and Malcolm Sawyer.

"Die französische Industriepolitik zeichnet sich seit jeher durch einen relativ hohen
Grad an staatlichem Interventionismus aus. Vor diesem Hintergrund eines traditionell
aktiven Staates kam es in den letzten Jahren im Bereich der Industriepolitik
wiederholt zu Missverständnissen mit den deutschen Nachbarn (EADS, Siemens/ Alstom, Sanofi-Aventis). Das erkennbare Bemühen der Regierung de Villepin um die Förderung 'nationaler Champions' hat aber auch in anderen EU-Staaten ein allgemeines Unwohlsein hervorgerufen. Die vorliegende Analyse zeigt, dass der diffuse 'Wirtschaftspatriotismus' der französischen
Regierung als eine rhetorische 'Waffe' zu verstehen ist, die lediglich politischen,
nicht aber wirtschaftlichen Zwecken dient. Jenseits der medienwirksamen
Rhetorik hat die französische Industriepolitik seit Beginn dieses Jahrzehnts eine
wirkliche Neuerung erfahren. Sie hat der traditionellen Kombination aus öffentlicher
Forschung, öffentlichen Unternehmen und öffentlichen Aufträgen entschieden
den Rücken gekehrt und mit den so genannten 'Wettbewerbspolen' ('pôles de compétivité'), der Agentur für industrielle Innovation (AII) und der Nationalen Forschungsagentur (ANR) eine andere Richtung eingeschlagen. Die neue französische Industriepolitik setzt die Lissabon-Strategie sinnvoll um, was die europäischen Partner Frankreichs beruhigen sollte." (Autorenreferat)

Regarding industry, the bank in broad acceptation it consists of all firms producing identical or substitutable goods and services, these companies are engaged in a close race to meet similar needs as the same type of buyers.The evolution of industries is influenced by several factors: the pace of structural adjustment, adaptability to market requirements, the level of technological endowment, technical and financial capacity to attract financial resources for investment and technological upgrading, attractiveness to investors, usability of effective workforce, the development of services for industrial activity.The main objective of EU industrial policy is to strengthen international competitiveness, while providing its customers quality products at competitive prices. In shaping industrial policy, EU experience can provide a benchmark reference for defining the objectives, ways of action, specific tools and concrete measures to implement the policy.

This timely and much-needed Handbook reconsiders an old topic from a fresh perspective, raising a number of new, interesting and worthwhile issues in the wake of ten years of globalization. This comprehensive analysis illustrates that old-style industrial policies whereby the government directly intervened in markets, and was often the producer itself, are no longer relevant. Structural changes occurring in economies--summarized in the term "globalization"--are triggering the definition and implementation of new industrial policies. The contributors, leading experts in their field, unite to evaluate this shift of over a decade ago

Highlighting the revival of industrial-policy thinking in an era of globalisation and disenchantment with free trade, this paper reviews alternative and, in part, competing theoretical foundations of industrial policy: neoclassical foundations, structuralist approaches, and pragmatic approaches inspired by new growth and development theories. One of the main conclusions is that the industrial-policy debate is no longer between advocates of horizontal and vertical policies, but between those who deny any potential for state intervention to make economies more dynamic and those who seek to clarify the specific conditions for appropriate intervention. Another salient conclusion is that state intervention is especially important in a knowledge-based economy, as witnessed by successful industrial policies in - for instance - the United States, Germany and France, and Finland.

Competition policy has seen quite significant changes over the past years. With the reform of Merger Control and the application of Article 81 (agreements) an 'effects-based, economic approach' was formally introduced by the Commission. Two other areas of competition policy are under discussion, namely state aid control and the application of Article 82 (abuse of a dominant position). It will be one of the key questions whether and to what extent an 'economic approach' should be followed here too. Some issues of competition policy with regard to industrial policy will be analysed in view of this changes. As the 'economic approach' is based on neoclassical market form analysis and welfare economics, I will try to make these approaches more comprehensive before I point to some problems which occur if the 'theory' were to be applied in real cases.