IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/iie/piiebs/piieb21-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Scoring 50 years of US industrial policy, 1970-2020

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Clyde Hufbauer

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Euijin Jung

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

Industrial policy is making a comeback in the United States. It is more urgent than ever to understand how and whether industrial policy has worked to strengthen the US economy. This study analyzes and scores 18 US industrial policy episodes implemented between 1970 and 2020, in an effort to assess what went right and what went wrong--and how the current initiatives might fare. These case studies can guide policymakers as they embark on what appears to be a major initiative in US government involvement in the economy today. The authors divide the 18 case studies into three broad categories: cases where trade measures blocked the US market or opened foreign markets, cases where federal or state subsidies were targeted to specific firms, and cases where public and private R&D was funded to advance technology. The outcome of each episode is scored by grading three criteria: (1) the effect on US competitiveness in global markets (or in some cases the national market), (2) whether the annual cost per job saved or created in the sector was reasonable (i.e., no more than the prevailing average wage), and (3) whether support advanced the technological frontier. Some of the episodes are partly or entirely successful while others are complete failures. Industrial policy can save or create jobs, but often at high cost. A major political selling point for industrial policy is to save or create jobs in a specific industry or location. In most cases, import protection does not create a competitive US industry, and it imposes extreme costs on household and business users per job-year saved. Trade policy concentrated on opening markets abroad is a better bet. Designating a single firm to advance technology yields inconsistent results. The highly successful model of Operation Warp Speed vividly demonstrates that competition is an American strength. R&D industrial policy has the best track record by far. Among the 18 cases, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has the outstanding record.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Euijin Jung, . "Scoring 50 years of US industrial policy, 1970-2020," PIIE Briefings, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number PIIEB21-5, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:iie:piiebs:piieb21-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/piie-briefings/2021/scoring-50-years-us-industrial-policy-1970-2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin Beraja & Wenwei Peng & David Y. Yang & Noam Yuchtman, 2024. "Government as Venture Capitalists in AI," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 4, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Russo, Margherita & Alboni, Fabrizio & Sanginés, Jorge Carreto & De Domenico, Manlio & Mangioni, Giuseppe & Righi, Simone & Simonazzi, Annamaria, 2023. "Regionalisation and cross-region integration. Twin dynamics in the automotive international trade networks," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 98-114.
    3. Xu, Tao Louie & Hu, Yabei, 2024. "Towards sustainable prosperity? Policy evaluation of Jiangsu advanced manufacturing clusters," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Alessio Terzi & Monika Sherwood & Aneil Singh, 2023. "European industrial policy for the green and digital revolution," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(5), pages 842-857.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iie:piiebs:piieb21-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.