Contradictions of Capitalist Industrialization in East Asia: A Critique of “Flying Geese” Theories of Development

According to most development economists, the economic “miracle” of the ASEAN-3, following the earlier experiences of Japan and the Asian NIEs, demonstrates the benefits of export-led growth. This conclusion is shared by neoliberals and structural-institutionalists, despite disagreements over the role of state intervention. Both views are represented in increasingly influential “flying geese” theories, which credit regional economic dynamics, in particular those shaped by Japanese foreign direct investment, for the regional advance. Our critique of this perspective starts by showing how the successive waves of Japanese foreign direct investment represented responses by Japanese capital to the class-based and competitive contradictions of Japan’s accumulation process. The recent expansion of NIE-based foreign direct investment in the ASEAN-3 is likewise a response to the contradictions of export-led growth, although in the NIEs’ case these contradictions were accentuated by economic dependency on Japanese capital. Contrary to celebratory flying geese perspectives, we find that this hierarchical regionalization of investment and production, and resulting intensification of competitiveness pressures, does not offer sustainable improvements in work and living conditions in Japan, the NIEs, or the ASEAN-3. However, by creating a more regionalized class structure in which core, semiperipheral, and peripheral area workers are subjected to a common set of competitiveness pressures, East Asian industrialization creates the potential for a regionalization and strengthening of worker/community resistance to capitalism.