Jump to content

Le retour de la politique industrielle ?


Adrian

Recommended Posts

Economists Reconsider Industrial Policy

 

Citation

Improved methods of causal inference are also leading economists to revise their views. Traditionally, economists assessed the effects of industrial policy by examining whether industries receiving more government help performed better – generally reaching a negative conclusion. It is now recognized that such correlational work is uninformative, because it cannot distinguish between cases where industrial policy is useful and not.

 

The more recent research uses modern statistical techniques to avoid misleading inferences. Such techniques have been applied to a wide variety of cases, including historical episodes of promotion of infant industries (such as textiles, shipbuilding, and heavy industries); large-scale public research and development efforts (as in the “space race” between the United States and the Soviet Union); and selective place-based policies targeting specific firms or industries (as in the US manufacturing drive during World War II and contemporary regional European subsidies).

 

The results of this research are much more favorable to industrial policy, tending to find that such policies – or historical accidents that mimic their effects – have often led to large, seemingly beneficial long-term effects in the structure of economic activity. For example, the disruption to French imports during the Napoleonic blockade stimulated French industrialization in mechanized cotton spinning long after the end of the Napoleonic wars. These results are consistent with what proponents of nurturing infant industries would argue.

 

Studies of recent public programs to subsidize investment in lagging regions of Britain and Italy have similarly found strong positive effects on employment creation. While these studies cannot provide a definitive answer to whether industrial policy works in general, they are informative about the prevalence of the market failures targeted by the policy and about the policy’s long-term effects.

 

To cite one example, studies of South Korea’s Heavy-Chemical Industry Drive (HCI), a landmark – and controversial – industrial policy pursued by President Park Chung-hee in the 1970s, found that the policy promoted the growth of targeted industries, both in the short and long run. HCI’s effects on productivity and export performance were both positive.

 

Critics of East Asian policies thought governments could never pick the right sectors because they lacked information on where market failures were more prominent. Princeton economist Ernest Liu has recently provided a useful guide for policymakers confronting an economy where market imperfections occur across multiple, linked sectors. In such settings, subsidizing upstream sectors generally minimizes policy mistakes. Liu shows that the actual policies used in China and during South Korea’s HCI were in line with this guidance.

 

Avec l'IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) aux USA et les politiques industrielles en Europe (Net Zero Industry Act), on voit réapparaître dans les revues économiques et les laboratoires d'idée occidentaux une vision intellectuellement plus positive de la politique industrielle, l'état stratège en quelque sorte.

 

Il n'y a pas de page état stratège sur wikiberal d'ailleurs.

 

Comment l’Europe peut réussir sa politique industrielle

 

Link to comment
il y a 10 minutes, Adrian a dit :

large-scale public research and development efforts (as in the “space race” between the United States and the Soviet Union); and selective place-based policies targeting specific firms or industries (as in the US manufacturing drive during World War II

L'économie de guerre ou les grands projets peuvent marcher parce qu'on connait à l'avance leurs objectifs de manière relativement claire ; mais l'économie de marché est un processus qui n'a pas de but défini à l'avance, et dont la direction se découvre au fur et à mesure du processus.

 

il y a 10 minutes, Adrian a dit :

To cite one example, studies of South Korea’s Heavy-Chemical Industry Drive (HCI), a landmark – and controversial – industrial policy pursued by President Park Chung-hee in the 1970s, found that the policy promoted the growth of targeted industries, both in the short and long run. HCI’s effects on productivity and export performance were both positive.

Ah oui, Park Chung-hee, qui a bénéficié de 18 ans de pouvoir quasi-dictatorial dans un pays de famille souche et de valeurs confucéennes (ce qui est partiellement redondant), c'est parfaitement applicable au reste du monde. :lol:

 

La démocratie, la relative diversité des sociétés occidentales, et surtout leur liberté d'opinion sont un obstacle à toute politique industrielle suivie et d'ampleur. A moins que le prétexte de la politique industrielle ne soit évidemment le cheval de Troie pour détruire tout ça.

Link to comment
Il y a 2 heures, Rincevent a dit :

Ah oui, Park Chung-hee, qui a bénéficié de 18 ans de pouvoir quasi-dictatorial

 

Un élément que certains ont avancé pour expliquer la moins bonne performance industrielle des pays du sud de l'Europe (l'Espagne, l'Italie ou la Grèce notamment) : leur instabilité gouvernementale (une des raisons pourquoi Meloni veut un pouvoir exécutif plus fort afin de mener des politiques industrielles à long terme) + le fait d'être éloigné de la région industrialisée la plus dynamique de l'Europe (la « mégalopole européenne » avec l'Allemagne, les Pays-Bas avec leur port très performant).

Link to comment

Et donc nos bons maîtres vont promouvoir le parlementarisme rationalisé et la managed democracy. C'est comme la liberté positive ou la justice sociale, ça sonne comme la liberté ou la justice mais ça n'a plus grand-chose à voir dans le fond.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...