2000 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Comparative Study of Japanese and Korean Economy-Industry and Company-
| Project/Area Number |
10045012
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B).
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Business administration
|
|---|
| Research Institution | KYOTO UNIVERSITY |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
AKAOKA Isao Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 教授 (10025190)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
TAO Masao Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 教授 (40094403)
NSHIMURA Syuzou Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 教授 (10027576)
NAKANO Ishyn Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 教授 (40025193)
SHIOJI Hirosi Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.associate professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 助教授 (60215944)
HHORI Kazuo Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto Univ.professor, 大学院・経済学研究科, 教授 (60219201)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1998 – 2000
|
| Keywords | East Asia economic / Asian Economic Crisis / structural reform |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
This seminar was held several year after the start of the Asian Economic Crisis, and was able to gather observations from various angles on the characteristics of the crisis. Regarding MIT Professor Paul Krugman's much-noticed article "Myth of Asia's Miracle" (Foreign Affairs, Nov.1994), a neoclassical analysis on the division of functions between government and market was presented. From the standpoint of quantitative analysis, analysis based on a consolidated capital economic model was presented, stating that root cause of South Korea's economic crisis was the decline of the currency, which in turn was caused by structural trade deficit. (A debate occurred when simulation of future capital outflow was presented.) An analysis of the actions of South
Korean media, academia and government, as well as the actions of United States and the IMF as the crisis unfolded was presented, as was a comparison of the crisis with crises in Latin America and Southeast Asia.
Many provocative findings on
… More
Japanese and South Korean economies and businesses-areas experiencing rapid change in the light of the collapse of the two countries' financial policies-were presented. There was debate on whether to interpret such crises as the disintegration of the two countries' economic frameworks or to interpret such crises as transitions to new economic frameworks. There was marked difference in opinion between Japanese and South Korean researchers on just how much cooperation would be possible between Japanese and South Korean industrial structures. And, an opinion was heard that called for South Korea to formulate policy that would emulate in South Korea the success of Japan's small businesses-often cited as a strong point of the Japanese economy-and their advancement into Asia. Regarding changes in employment practices in Japan and South Korea (developments of wide concern for both countries), there was a presentation as well as a debate which showed well the effectiveness of comparative analysis. There also was a presentation on the inner workings of the dismantlement of Japanese employment practices as well as an explanation of the Japanese tendency for worker shortage. A question wasasked querying what policies the rise of the the labor movement in South Korea since the latter half of the 1980s will bring forth in the light of the current economic crisis. There also was debate on what the advancement of employment practices would consist of as international competition intensifies.
Many researchers presented opinions stating that an important topic for the immediate future is reform in East Asia economic structure that would cover not just Japan and South Korea but also China, where open-door policies are being enacted. Also, opinions were heard that stated IMF's plans for structural reform should be contrasted by actively proposing alternate plans based on conditions in Asian countries. And, numerous clearly defined ideas (including many policy proposals) in fields of finance, labor, technology, corporate practices, etc. were presented, followed by debates among researchers. Less
|
