Re: Japanese "development"

[Brad DeLong <delong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> [was: Re: [PEN-L:9327] Re: Re: Re: Japan]
>
> Michael Perelman asked:
> > > Another question.  Haven't all of the economic "miracles" fizzled.  I,
> > > too, was under the impression that the Japanese bureaucrats were clever,
> > > thinking that there was an exception to the miracle rule.
>
> Brad writes:
> > Oh, the bureaucrat of MITI were quite clever--and very interested
> > in promoting economic development. But even during the heyday of
> > the Japanese miracle there were a lot of other bureaucrats
> > regulating agriculture, retail trade, finance, and so on who were
> > clever too but not that interested in promoting economic
> > development...
>
> The vagueness of this formulation is amazing! (What happened to the
> alleged rigor of orthodox economic thinking?) Specifically, what is
> "economic development"? does that refer to increasing "real" GDP per
> capita? or do we measure "development" by looking at measures such
> as the Genuine Progress Indicator, which includes a lot of benefits
> (and subtracts a lot of costs) missed by GDP? or do we think of
> "development" in some broader sense that can't be quantified?

I was actually thinking of the McKinsey Global Institute's
comparative study of manufacturing productivity in Japan, German, and
the U.S., and the *extraordinary* dual economy it showed. The
contrast between those sectors regulated by MITI and those regulated
by other ministries is amazing...

But in the future all my formulations will be rigorous.


Brad DeLong