Post-Crisis Economic Reform in Indonesia:Policy for Intervening in Ownership in Historical Perspective

Introduction : Economic reform in Indonesia after the Asian currency crisis is often discussed in parallel with Thailand and South Korea, which were alike hit by the crisis. It should however be noted that what happened in Indonesia was a change of political regime from authoritarianism to democracy, not just a change of government as seen in Thailand and South Korea. Indonesia’s post-crisis reform should be understood in the context of dismantling of the Soeharto regime to seek a new democratic state system. 　　　In the political sphere, dramatic institutional changes have occurred since the downfall of the Soeharto government in May 1998. In comparison, changes in the economic sphere are more complex than the political changes, as the former involve at least three aspects. The first is the continuity in the basic framework of capitalist system with policy orientation toward economic liberalization. In this framework, the policies to overcome the crisis are continued from the last period of the Soeharto rule, under the support system of IMF and CGI (Consultative Group on Indonesia). The second aspect is the impact of the political regime change on the economic structure. It is considered that the structure of economic vested interests of the Soeharto regime is being disintegrated as the regime breaks down. The third aspect is the impact of the political regime change on economic policy-making process. The process of formulating and implementing policies has changed drastically from the Soeharto time. With these three aspects simultaneously at work, it is not so easy to identify which of them is the main cause for a given specific economic phenomenon emerging in Indonesia today. 　　　Keeping this difficulty in mind, this paper attempts to situate the post-crisis economic reform in the broader context of the historical development of Indonesian economic policies and their achievements. We focus in particular on the reform policies for banking and corporate sectors and resulting structural changes in these sectors. This paper aims at understanding the significance of the changes in the economic ownership structure that are occurring in the post-Soeharto Indonesia. Economic policies here do not mean macro economic policies, such as fiscal, financial and trade policies, but refer to micro economic policies whereby the government intervenes in the economic ownership structure. In Section 1, we clarify why economic policies for intervening in the ownership structure are important in understanding Indonesia. Section 2 follows the historical development of Indonesia’s economic policies as specified above, throughout the four successive periods since Indonesia’s independence, namely, the parliamentary democracy period, the Guided Democracy period under Soekarno, the Soeharto-regime consolidation period, and the Soeharto-regime transfiguration period2. Then we observe what economic ownership structure was at work in the pre-crisis last days of the Soeharto rule as an outcome of the economic policies. In Section 3, we examine what structural changes have taken place in the banking and corporate sectors due to the reform policies in the post-crisis and post-Soeharto Indonesia. Lastly in Section 4, we interpret the current reorganization of the economic ownership in the context of the historical transition of the ownership structure, taking account of the changes in the policy-making processes under democratization.

Infrastructure development and economic growth in China

China is the fastest growing country in the world for last few decades and one of the defining features of China's growth has been investment-led growth. China's sustained high economic growth and increased competitiveness in manufacturing has been underpinned by a massive development of physical infrastructure. In this context, we investigate the role of infrastructure in promoting economic growth in China for the period 1975 to 2007. Overall, the results reveal that infrastructure stock, labour force, public and private investments have played an important role in economic growth in China. More importantly, we find that Infrastructure development in China has significant positive contribution to growth than both private and public investment. Further, there is unidirectional causality from infrastructure development to output growth justifying China's high spending on infrastructure development since the early nineties. The experience from China suggests that it is necessary to design an economic policy that improves the physical infrastructure as well as human capital formation for sustainable economic growth in developing countries.

Chapter 1 Economic Integration and Industry Location: Theories, Empirical Results, and Implications for CLMV

Trade affects the internal location of industry in two ways: it induces firms to specialize and it expands the set of markets that firms serve. If there are industry-specific external economies, firms in related industries will spatially agglomerate (Hanson 1996a). In the context of economic integration, diminished barriers to trade affect industry location particularly in less developed countries. As described below, regional agreements in North America and Europe have caused frontier regions to expand. These regions, which include border regions and port cities, have advantages over internal regions in terms of access to foreign markets. Since trade liberalization induces many firms in developing countries to participate in production networks and to specialize in labor-intensive activities such as assembling and processing of foreign-made components, their inputs as well as final products need to be carried across borders. Therefore, the best industry location, one that minimizes transport costs, is likely to shift to frontier regions. In East Asia, China has developed rapidly since it opened up to international trade. Simultaneously, a large amount of foreign direct investment (FDI) has been attracted and industry agglomerations have been formed in coastal regions, that is, frontier regions linked to the global market by sea, leaving many internal regions behind. Similarly, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam (CLMV) have joined AFTA and/or the WTO and liberalized international trade since the 1990s. Moreover, transport infrastructures such as the East-West Economic Corridor, the Southern Economic Corridor, and the North-South Economic Corridor have been built and narrowed economic distances in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS). As a result, frontier regions are likely to increase their location advantages and lure labor-intensive operations from neighboring countries. It is expected that, as has happened in North America and Europe, economic integration in East Asia will significantly affect internal geography in CLMV. In this study, I first review theories relevant to economic integration and industry location within a country. In particular, emphasis is placed on the new economic geography (NEG). Secondly, empirical results for North America and Europe are surveyed since they have preceded East Asia in regional integration and a substantial number of studies have been conducted on these regions. The final section summarizes and discusses implications for internal geography in CLMV.

Chapter 6 Economic integration and changes in industrial location in Vietnam

Vietnam has been praised for its achievements in economic growth and success in poverty reduction over the last two decades. The incidence of poverty reportedly fell from 58.1% in 1993 to 19.5% in 2004 (VASS [2006, 13]). The country is also considered to have only a moderate level of aggregate economic inequality by international comparisons. As of the early 2000s, Vietnam’s consumption-based Gini coefficient is found to be comparable to that of other countries with similar levels of per capita GDP. The Gini index did increase between 1993 and 2004, but rather slowly, from 0.34 to 0.37 (VASS [2006, 13]). Yet, as the country moves on with its market oriented reforms, the question of inequality has been highlighted in policy and academic discourses. In particular, it is pointed out that socio-economic inequalities between regions (or provinces) are significant and have been widening behind aggregate figures (NCSSH [2001], Mekong Economics [2005], VASS [2006]). Between 1993 and 2004, while real per capita expenditure increased in all regions, it grew fastest in those regions with the highest per capita expenditures and vice versa, resulting in greater regional disparities (VASS [2006, 37]). A major contributing factor to such regional inequalities is the uneven distribution of industry within the country. According to the Statistical Yearbook of Vietnam, of the country's gross industrial output in 2007, over 50% belongs to the South East region, close to 25% to the Red River Delta, and about 10% to the Mekong River Delta. All remaining regions share some 10% of the country's gross industrial output. At a quick glance, the South East increased its share of the total industrial gross output in the 1990s, while the Red River Delta started to gain ground in more recent years. How can the government deal with regional disparities is a valid question. In order to offer an answer, it is necessary in the first place to grasp the trend of disparities as well as its background. To that end, this paper is a preparatory endeavor. Regional disparities in industrial activities can essentially be seen as a result of the location decisions of enterprises. While the General Statistics Office (GSO) of Vietnam has conducted one enterprise census (followed by annual enterprise surveys) and two stages of establishment censuses since 2000, sectorally and geographically disaggregated data are not readily available. Therefore, for the moment, we will draw on earlier studies of industrial location and the determinants of enterprises’ location decisions in Vietnam. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. The following two sections deal with the country context. Section 2 will outline some major developments in Vietnam’s international economic relations that may affect sub-national location of industry. According to the theory of spatial economics, economic integration is seen as a major driver of changes in industrial location, both between and within countries (Nishikimi [2008]). Section 3, on the other hand, will consider some possible factors affecting geographic distribution of industry in the domestic sphere. In Section 4, existing literature on industrial and firm location will be examined, and Section 5 will briefly summarize the findings and suggest some areas for future research.