Drawing on the experience of your own countries, to what extent do you think the East Asian(especially Chinese) economic developmental strategies are applicable to your own countries

Term Paper:

[Drawing on the Experiences of your own Countries, to what extent do you think the East Asian (especially Chinese) economic developmental strategies are applicable to your own countries?]
For
Comparative Politics and Governments

Submitted To:
Prof. Wang Qingxin

By:
Group Two

January 13, 2010
Group Lists
1. Jasper Tetteh Ahafianyo [e-mail]
2. John A.D. Perkins [e-mail]
3. Kouzoumna Bernard [e-mail]
4. Phan Channarith [e-mail]

Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Neo-classical Arguments Endorsed by Robert Wade 3
Economic Developmental Experiences and Conditions of Liberia, Central African Republic, Cambodia, and Ghana 9
Liberia 9
Central African Republic 12
Ghana 16
Transferability of the Chinese Economic Development Model 18
References 21

Introduction
Our discussion focused on Robert Wade’s article dubbed “East Asia’s Economic Success Conflicting Perspectives, Partial Insights, Shaky Evidence. The arguments in his article were based on the explanation of the East Asian’s economic success from a simple neoclassical point of views which was rejected by Amsden, Haggard and Hughes. In addition, we reviewed the arguments of He Li concerning the Chinese model as per the requirement of the topic.

Further, we opened up the discussion by discussing political, government regimes and economic growth of our individual countries – Liberia, Central African Republic, Cambodia, and Ghana. We concluded our discussions by tracing through the works of the above researchers to note the extent to which the Chinese economic development model could be applicable in our countries.

Neo-classical Arguments Endorsed by Robert Wade
Firstly, the argument started with the rejection of simplistic neo-classical explanation of East Asian economies economic development success by Helen

References: 1. Amsden Alice. “Third World Industrialization: ‘Global Fordism’ or a New Model?” New Left Review 182(1990), 14 – 15. 2. Amsden Alice. Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989, 379pp. 3. Haggard Stephan. Pathways from the Periphery: The Politics of Growth in the Newly Industrializing Countries. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1990, 276pp 4. Hughes, ed. Achieving Industrialization in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988, 377pp 5. Li He. The Chinese Path of Economic Reform and Its Implications. Asian Affairs: An American Review. January 1, 2005. 6. Tiepoh Nah Geepu. “External Debt and Political Chaos: Future of Liberia 's Economic Policy”. www.theperspective.org 7. Wade Robert. “East Asia’s Economic Success Conflicting Perspectives, Partial Insights, Shaky Evidence.