The crisis in planning is discussed in the inability of plans to meet their objectives. Problems include: plan
designs that are often over-ambitious while vague on specific policies, data often insufficient or unreliable,
unanticipated shocks that can wreak havoc, a planning agency often weak and ineffective, and countries
that lack the political will to carry out otherwise sound plans.
The role of markets has been gaining ground at the expense of planning since the early 1980s. Many
developing countries have attempted to reduce the role of the public sector, eliminate distortions in interest
rates, wages, and prices, and encourage growth in the private sector. Development problems have been
increasingly viewed (especially by aid agencies) as exacerbated by planning policies. The importance of
government failure as well as market failure is stressed, and Box 11.1 presents a list of drawbacks of
government intervention in developing countries.
In converting to a more market based economy, the text presents a broad range of institutional and cultural
requirements for the operation of effective private markets and for market-facilitating legal and economic
practices.
The 10 points of the Washington Consensus are described. These 10 points defined the approach to
development policy in the 1980’s and 1990’s. In Box 11.1, the ten points are evaluated with respect
to South Korea and Taiwan. The Santiago Consensus is then described and then summarized in Box 11.2.
A section explores the political economy of successful policy reform and implementation. Whether
democracy or autocracy facilitates faster growth is also discussed in this section. A final section, “Trends
in governance and reform,” takes up the topics of corruption, decentralization, and development
participation.
In sum, the text emphasizes the need for both a public and private sector and the need for these sectors
to cooperate in areas where government can best play a role, and in areas the private market should be
left unencumbered. South Korea and Taiwan are cited as examples of successful proactive government
industrial policy.
Lecture Suggestions
Section 11.2’s subsection on market failure (page 545) provides an opportunity to return to the discussion of
multiple equilibria in chapter 4, the discussion in the same chapter regarding deep interventions, the
divergence of private and social benefits in education discussed in chapter 8, and the presentation of Kaushik
Basu’s model of child labor (also in chapter 8) along with many other topics covered in the preceding 10
chapters. This review of market failure when coupled with the authors’ excellent discussion of government
failure (section 11.4) should make it far easier for students to understand how challenging it is to find the
proper balance between private initiative and coordinated action (i.e. between markets and public policy).
It may be far more difficult for students to understand the faith in planning that was commonplace before the
1980s. Section 11.3 may well be worth the time if you wish to chronicle the successes and failures of
development planning post WWII to 1980 and to put the Washington consensus in some historical
perspective. One helpful way of organizing class discussion regarding the question of balance would be to
describe policy being much like a pendulum that first swung to the left (toward planning and away from
markets) and then to the right (away from planning and toward markets) to much more nuanced view(thanks
in no small part to advances in our understanding of economic development) that, ideally, the New
Consensus described in section 11.6 reflects.
In light of Box 11.1 on page 560 and the discussion of South Korea and Taiwan Robert Wade’s Governing
the Market is again highly recommended as an excellent source for background of these two very important
economies.