Suchergebnisse

Mainstream economists blame the poor 1980s economic performance of most Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries on the poor economic policies followed by the region for the past several decades and recommend drastic policy changes including (a) elimination of many subsidies, (b) lowering tariffs and other obstacles to international trade, (c) privatization of many state enterprises, (d) liberalization of capital markets and interest rates, and so on — a policy package designed to lower greatly the government's intervention in the economy. This policy advice has been inspired, at least in part, by the generally accepted failure of the LAC governments to promote stable and fair growth through intervention.However, in spite of pressures by multilateral and bilateral agencies, most governments find it very difficult to implement these policies, even when policymakers and their advisers fully understand the logic behind the policy recommendations and agree with them.

Contents: Examples of "irrational" economic policies in Ecuador; The nature of the state and its economic policies; Bad policies or inadequate institutions? The role of the external agencies.

Economic growth and government policies in small Caribbean countries have been conditioned (1) by the very large fluctuations in their external sector which continuously change the relative profitability of the various productive sectors of their economies, greatly complicating the macroeconomics management of their economies; (2) by the attempts of their governments to cope with those fluctuations; and (3) by the political economy relations that prevail in those countries, and that determine the nature of government intervention and the role of the private sector.

Focuses on the performance manufacturing sector since the 1960s.

Differences in the degree of economic development and diversification among members of economic integration systems could easily create obstacles to economic integration, as they tend to have an impact on the distribution of costs and benefits of economic integration processes.There are several reasons why the Least Developed Members (LDMs) within integration movements in Latin America are likely to be losers in the integration processes taking place within the region. First, the economies of these countries are less diversified than those of the more advanced countries. The LDMs have manufacturing sectors which are not well developed and which are concentrated in productive branches which process natural resources. When these countries join an integration movement with countries with more advanced and diversified manufacturing sectors, they would tend to import manufactured goods which are more protected than the natural-resource-based goods which they are likely to export.

Economic development—defined by growth of GNP per capita—among the poor countries of the world during the last 25 years has been higher than in almost any other period in mankind's history. Although this growth might have not been as high as that expected by some policy makers, the 1950-1975 period shows an overall improvement over the recent past. In spite of this apparent surge in growth, many policy makers and social scientists have shown disappointment and dismay at some characteristics of the recent increases in GNP (Morawetz, 1977).