国际经济学

2. 进口替代战略存在的问题

1) 高贸易保护使进口替代部门容易滋生不思进取的心态和作风金属进步和创新的动力被削弱。

2) 外债风险加大进口替代具有反出口倾向不利于出口部门出口创汇能力低下。

3) 阻隔了本国向外国学习的机会，不利于企业参与国际竞争。

措施：在初级阶段，通常应该或者禁止的那些进口商品，几乎都是消费品。因为，与生产资本品、中间产品相比较，生产消费品所需要的生产技术水平比较简单，所需投资也低得多，易于开办企业。这也意味着由国内生产的和进口的消费品在成本方面差距小，而资本品和中间产品的成本差距很大。因此消费品的进口替代的代价小，再者，消费品的市场是现存的，资本品、中间产品的需求则是由投资引致的。

至于或禁止进口的最关键措施，则是实行保护。具体措施是，在关税方面实行差别关税制度，对或者禁止进口的消费品征收高额税率阻止其进口，对实行进口替代所需要的资本品或中间产品采用优惠税率；在外汇管理方面，实行外汇管制，不提供需要替代的消费品的进口外汇，同时也可以把本国货币对外币的币值定得很高，即外币表示

本国货币汇率很高。通过这些措施使资本品和中间产品的进口成本低于它的真实成本，以鼓励替代进口的消费品的生产。通过以上措施，当受保护的消费品的生产满足国内市场需要之后，这一阶段的替代过程即告结束。

实施进口替代在一定程度上刺激了民族工业中消费品工业的发展，加强了发展中国家发展经济的能力，能够减少经济的对外依赖程度，一些专门技术人才和熟练劳动力也培养出来了，部门从中也获得了管理经济的经验和知识，有助于提高其产品的国际竞争力,改善一国的对外贸易的结构和条件,提高一国的对外开放水平，有效防止了贸易条件恶化。因此许多拉美、南亚、中欧国家选择了进口替代战略，一定程度上实现了经济发展目标。但是这一战略对刺激民族工业的发展是有限的，因为它并不能完全消除对外的依赖性，它依然在很大程度上依赖进口，它只是改变了进口商品的结构，从成品进口改为进口中国不具备的原料、技术专利、机器设备、中间产品与资本等。当发展中国家用高关税保护民族工业时，发达国家也用各种措施破坏或打破关税保护，抵制发展中国家的进口替代，所以进口替代战略常常出现为力的状态，在实践中逐渐暴露出许多缺陷。

1970年，利特尔等人考察了巴西、印度、墨西哥、巴基斯坦、菲律宾等国家及中国地区的工业化发展经验后认为，进口替代战略严重降低了经济效率、抑制出口、加剧失业、导致国际收支恶化。因此，实际上从20世纪60年代中期开始，一些国家和地区就开始转向更加开放的贸易战略，特别是亚洲的日本、韩国、新加坡等国家及中国的地区在经过一段时间的进口替代工业化过渡后，采取了不遗余力的出口导向战略

二战之后，一些发展中的大国都采取了进口替代战略，并取得了一定的成效。成效之一是通过抵御外来产品的竞争保护了本国民族工业的建立和发展，改变了原来单一畸形的经济结构。其次，有助于改善落后的技术结构以及产业结构向高级阶段发展，为日后的对外发开打下基础。

进口替代战略在推行过程中也存在着一些问题，由于受到保护，国内工业没有来自国外的竞争压力，往往缺乏提高效率的动力。很多发展中国家国内市场狭小，产业发展难以形成规模经济，也就难以形成与发达国家相抗衡的竞争力。国内资源有限加上进口市场封闭，很难从发达国家进口先进的技术设备，难以形成资本密集和技术密集型产业的国内生产。

由于进口替代战略无法使经济得到持续发展，从20世纪60年代起，一些发展中国家和地区转而实施出口导向发展战略。

出口替代战略又称出口替代工业化或出口导向工业化，是外向型经济发展战略的产物。是指一国采取各种措施扩大出口，发展出口工业，逐步用轻工业产品出口替代初级产品出口，用重、化工业产品出口替代轻工业产品出口，以带动经济发展，实现工业化的。

1．出口导向战略存在的问题：

1) 易受国际市场波动的影响外资依存度过高，国民经济命脉易受外国资本操纵。

2) 以贸易带动经济的持续发展具有局限性。

国内产业结构布局贸易出现畸形发展一些产业容易出现产能过剩。

采取的措施主要是：

①给出口企业提供减免出口关税、出口退税、出口补贴、出口信贷和出口保险等，目的在于降低出口成本，开拓国外市场，增强出口竞争能力。

②给出口生产企业提供低利生产贷款，优先供给进口设备，原材料所需外汇，大力引进资本、技术、经营管理知识，建立出口加工区等，目的在于降低生产成本，提高产品质量，增加创汇能力。

在一个资金、技术缺乏，市场狭小和大部分人从事农业的不发达经济中。选择出口导向型战略：可以充分利用国外的资源，并与本国具有绝对优势的劳动力资源相结合，生产并出口本国具有比较优势的产品，以缓解一国的外汇压力；可以在国际分工中节约劳动，充分发挥自身的比较优势，在全球性的产业结构调整中，促进本国产业结构的优化升级，获取因分工而产生的规模经济效益；可以通过对外贸易，互通有无。使本国居民享受到更多的经济福利，提高其生活水平；可以通过外部市场的开拓，带动国内相关产业和部门的发展，不仅为国内的剩产品或闲置生产资源找到了出路，还扩大了就业量，等等。实施外向型经济的上述种种优越性，基本上已为人们所共识。但是，出口导向型发展模式也具有特殊的适用性及其局限性：

首先，出口导向型发展模式对子大国和小国的作用是不同的。一般而言，小国因市场容量较小，如采取出口导向型经济发展模式，积极扩大外贸出口，就可以使其产品生产达到规模经济的要求，取得较大的规模经济效益；另外，小国的失业劳动力、剩余产品、闲置生产资源的数量相对于大国而言都比较小，只要出口达到一定规模，就可能在很大程度上解决这些问题。而大国则不然，国内供给满足其国内需求的程度较高，无需过分依赖于国外的市场需求；其次，相对于小国而言，大国面临数额巨大的失业劳动力、剩余产品等问题，即使有较大的出口增长，也只能在一个相对较小的范围内解决问题。其次，依赖大量出口来推动本国经济发展，会增加本国经济的对外依赖性，从而丧失经济发展的主动权。

无论是发达国家还是发展中国家，在经济的发展过程中，一味地将出口作为经济的发展动力的话，最终可能会降低甚至丧失本国经济自我发展能力和抵御外部冲击的“免疫

力”，从而更易受到外部市场的摆布，这对一国经济的长远发展是非常不利的。特别对于发展中国家而言，这种危害性是很大而且显而易见的：

首先，发展中国家对外开放的水平受制于其国内的经济发展水平，这决定了即使一个经济落后的国家实行了全面的对外开放，其水平和层次也不会很高，这必然会降低其在开放中所能获取的比较利益；其次，发展中国家在国际政治经济旧秩序中处于非常不平等的地位，不平等的贸易地位将使之获利较少甚至无法获利，并且其贸易条件将不断恶化，从而使这些国家在对外开放中陷入比较利益的陷阱而无力逃脱；再其次，出口导向型战略的实施，容易使许多公司介入发展中国家的“出口替代活动”中，很容易使发展中国家的产品所有权、销售权和管理权落入其强有力的控制之中，这非常不利于发展中国家战略性产业的成长和起飞，并可能在发展中国家对一些公司失去控制力的情况下，危及这些国家的经济安全。第三、出口导向型发展战略的作用受到市场发展的制约。亚洲一些国家实施出口导向型战略，并取得较大成功有其特定的历史背景。一些国家所奉行的出口导向型。是以国外市场的需求，主要又是发达国家的市场需求为重点的。在20世纪七、八十年代，正值西方产业结构调整的高潮，西方产业结构的高级化，使得一些传统产业逐步退出其市场，这时实施出口导向型战略，将大量传统产业打入发达国家市场，正好适应了其市场上传统产品不足，需要填补的要求；另外，20世纪80 年代之前实行出口导向型战略的国家较少，传统产业的市场还未饱和，因此，相对于没有实施该战略的国家而言，少数实施出口导向型战略的国家，就很容易从相对较大容量的传统产品市场中获益。

A belief in the inevitability and benefits of globalization has led to the argument that countries should open their economies. Conversely, there is also a belief that the negative effects of globalization outweigh any potential benefits and therefore countries should become more protectionist. These viewpoints reflect an old debate over the pros and cons of import substitution and export

promotion. This paper examines the old arguments and suggests that a forced choice between the two may not necessarily be the best approach and that countries should consider ways of adopting both methods.

Keywords: Import Substitution; Export Promotion; Economic Development; Developing Countries.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. Developing countries (LDCs) have adopted a number of approaches in their attempts to move their economies and societies from a so-called \"backward\" orientation towards a more \"modern\" one. Crucial to this process was a desire to change from a rural-traditional dominance to a more modern-industrial mode for the simple reason that development was equated with industrialization. As a result, LDCs pursued a policy of rapid industrialization primarily through a process of import substitution. Some of the negative consequences of this process led to what is considered to be an opposite approach to economic development, the policy of export promotion. The literature, however, still continues to offer a lot of debate (Razzaque and Raihan, 2008; Shafaeddin, 2005).

3. 2. IMPORT SUBSTITUTION STRATEGY

4. In talking of import substitution, it is important to distinguish between that which occurs \"naturally\" in the course of economic growth and development, and that which forms the object of governmental policy. \"Natural\" import substitution

takes place as domestic incomes rise and the range of products that can be produced competitively for the domestic market increases. Goods that were previously imported because domestic demand was too small to support competitive local production are gradually replaced or supplemented by locally produced goods. Import substitution in this paper refers, not to this \"natural\" process, but rather to that which takes place as a result of a deliberate governmental policy.

5. The primary incentive for initiating import substitution is the prospect of industrialization and the economic gains associated with it. Behind this incentive lies the desire to be rid of the chronic long-run structural disequilibria in patterns of production and trade. Specifically, import substitution has been based on the following arguments: infant industry protection; instability of foreign market earnings and the need-for self-sufficiency (Prebisch, 1962); savings for investment, since industries are assumed to save more; a need to conserve foreign exchange and improve balance of payments; additional exports of primary products would turn the terms of trade against the exporting country (Cypher and Dietz, 1997).

3. EXPORT PROMOTION STRATEGY

4. As a result of these criticisms of the policy of import substitution a number of economists e.g. have proposed export-led models of development (Caves, 1970). Export expansion is important for it is almost nearly a necessary condition for sustained growth and development over any lengthy period. Exports are viewed as an \"engine of growth\and increases in exports stimulate domestic

investment through an accelerator effect. The increase in investment has the consequence of increasing the internal demand while at the same time expanding productive capacity and productivity. If money wages are assumed to increase at the same rate in other trading countries, then the rise in productivity will result in relative price stability and an improvement in international competitiveness. So long as exports keep increasing there will be a self-reinforcing tendency for a country to maintain its competitive position and to continue its economic growth. Exports then make possible the benefits from trade, pay for the imports required in development both directly and indirectly (by adding to borrowing and debtservicing capacity).

5. Policies to promote export expansion have included the following: subsidies, realistic exchange rates, and trade agreements. Export expansion may generally take two forms: primary commodity export expansion; and manufactured goods export expansion. Export expansion is however not necessarily easier. Todaro (1977) identified factors militating against rapid expansion in exports of primary products, especially agricultural, to the developed countries. On the demand side he cites the following: low per capita income elasticity of demand for agricultural foodstuffs and raw materials; developed country population growth rates at or near replacement levels; low price elasticity of demand for most non-fuel primary commodities; development of synthetic substitutes; growth of

6. In addition to these factors, there are also supply side considerations in the form of structural rigidities that work against rapid expansion of primary product earnings. Examples of such rigidities are limited resources, antiquated rural

institutional, social and economic structures and non-productive patterns of land tenure.

7. The goal of expanding manufactured exports was given impetus by the \"success\" stories of such LDCs as Taiwan, South Korea and Brazil during the 1960s and 1970s. In recent times, however, growing protection in developed countries has again dampened the viability of this kind of expansion. This outward-looking strategy of development based on export promotion is generally considered to be a better one than that of import-substitution in the literature (Weiss, 1999; Krueger, 1998). The leading examples of the success of this approach, subsequently dubbed the \"Gang of Four\" are , South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Taiwan's export expansion was based to a great extent on exports of processed imported materials. Exports of industrial products rose from $12 million in 1957 to $280 million in 1966 (50% of total exports). These exports accounted for about 66% of the total increase in exports from Taiwan over the period. Exports of certain processed foods based on domestic produce such as pineapple, asparagus and mushrooms also increased substantially. This growth in industrial products did not come at the expense of exports of primary products. Taiwan's exports of bananas, for example, rose from 3.2% of total exports in 1962 to 9% in 1966. While Taiwan's success was in part due to external factors such as external aid and the Vietnam war which increased the demand for some of her exports, i.e. metals and building materials, credit must also go to the economic policies followed. These policies included the removal of import restrictions, the maintenance of \"realistic\" exchange rates, and the provision of export finance and insurance.

8. Similar economic policies are believed to have contributed in no small measure to the rapid expansion of fish meal exports from Peru and raw cotton from Central America. South Korea embarked upon an export-promotion strategy in the early 1960s after several years of very slow growth. The growth rate rose by over 40% per annum as a result of bias towards exports provided by the economic system. The rate of growth of GNP that was 6.1% in 1965 averaged 10.3% from 1966 to 1972. Brazil also experienced similar success after shifting to an outward-looking strategy in late 1967. Export earnings, which showed virtually zero growth from 19 to 1967, showed an average annual increase in excess of 25% from 1967 to 1973. The average annual rate of growth of real GDP from 1962 to 1967 was 3.7% but averaged 10.2% from 1968 to 1973.

Much of the literature deals with these two strategies as either/or propositions but it is doubtful whether this should be the case. While traditional approaches to import-substitution create a bias against exports it is believed this bias can be removed by other policies, as has been the case in Taiwan and Pakistan. Included in these policies are export subsidization and the case of multiple exchange rates. Such an approach would decrease some of the distortions arising from import-substitution to change the structure of the economy. The strategy to discourage primary commodity exports is fully consistent with efforts to reduce traditional patterns of dependence. However, a country cannot export manufactures without building the capacity to produce them and capacity cannot be built without import substituting. This is because the ratio of imports to domestic production of manufacturers in many LDCs is so high that attempts to create domestic capacity is bound to take the form of import substitution. There is

thus an implication of a sequence from primary specialization, to import substitution, to exports of manufactures. Findlay (1973) showed that this sequence is attained either by sufficiently large increases in productivity in manufacturing sectors, or through an increase in the propensity to save out of profits. Ahmad (1978) also indicated that the growth of import substitution in manufacturing is positively correlated with the growth of exports. Thus, sectors that showed a high growth of import substitution were also the ones that had a relatively high rate of export growth. The Brazilian experience indicates that significant exports of manufacturers arise only in industries where large scale import substitution has been successfully accomplished. As Chenery (1975, p.505) pointed out \"Although Brazil is on its way to becoming an efficient exporter of automobiles and machinery, a period of apparently inefficient import substitution may well have been necessary to structural change in both production and exports\". Green (1995) documented how the strategy advanced Latin America's economic development. In the 1960s domestic production provided 95% of Mexico's and 98% of Brazil's consumer goods and from 1950 to 1980, Latin America's industrial output rose six times.

Although countries that have built their development efforts around import substitution have experienced grave problems it is still possible to pursue the policy in a more satisfactory manner. The problems arose as a consequence of the kinds of activities selected and the methods adopted to bring about their development. As Bruton (1970, p. 124) put it, \"to implement their import substitution policy, countries have chosen instruments and techniques that seem, in effect, to prevent that very policy from being successful.\"

What is necessary then is a different approach to implementing the policy of import substitution. At the same time there is the need for export promotion. In effect there is a need for a twopronged approach for the two policies need not be mutually exclusive (Jha, 2008). As Masina (2006) indicated, the East Asian countries that became economically successful used a combination of selective import substitution and export promotion policies tailored to their national industrial strategies. In particular, protection against imports in the form of tariffs and quotas was constrained by limited duration or export obligations for the specific industry. It is therefore clear that the debate continues and will provide challenges for policy-makers and researchers.