论文部分内容阅读
60年代后半期,亚洲新兴工业化国家和地区,采用输出指向型工业化战略,经济获得高速发展。印度则采用输入替代型工业化战略,经济出现结构性的停滞。两种现实的对比,促使人们开始注意研究发展理论。南朝鲜的模式是,国家积极干预,充分发挥市场机制的作用,而印度的模式是,国家采取特别的介入政策,抑制市场机制的作用。于是,人们便探讨这两种模式的特点,“介入失败”说逐渐取代了“市场失败”说。而这种“市场失败”说,曾经被认为是印度模式的理论根据之一。
In the latter half of the 1960s, emerging industrialized countries and regions in Asia adopted an export-oriented industrialization strategy and their economy enjoyed rapid growth. In India, an alternative industrialization strategy was adopted and the economy stagnated structurally. The contrast between the two realities has prompted people to begin to pay attention to the theory of research and development. South Korea’s model is that the state actively intervenes and gives full play to its role as a market mechanism. India’s model is that the state adopts a special intervention policy to curb the role of the market mechanism. So, people will explore the characteristics of these two modes, “intervention failure” that gradually replaced “market failure ” said. And this “market failure” says that it was once considered one of the theoretical bases for the Indian model.