From the end of World War II into 1960s, the formative period of what we now call “Development Economics” intense debate centered on why some countries grew rich while others languished. Because scars from the great depression were still fresh, the traditional nineteenth-century liberal approach based on free trade in domestic and foreign markets was somewhat discredited. Instead, influential economists tended to emphasize problems of market failure and the need for informed official intervention – with import tariffs or domestic subventions – to overcome economic or technical backwardness. Also, in the 1950s and 1960s the centrally planned economies of Eastern European apparently grew exceedingly fast, with the former Soviet Union (FSU) in particular showing impressive overall technical achievements. Thus governments in less developed countries (LDCs) throughout Latin America, Africa and parts of Asia were emboldened to intervene quite massively in their domestic economics. Protectionism in foreign trade, price controls, and subsides in domestic trade and exclusive franchises for parastatals (State Owned Enterprises) proliferated in all branches of industry. Instead of an open capital market, detailed controls over the flow of money and credit ensured that the repressed financial markets passively served the governments’ own ends. Indeed, in the centrally planned socialist economies, the banking system was completely passive: credit at zero or disequilibrium low rates of interest were provided automatically if necessary to ensure plan fulfillment. However, in mid of 1980s, astonishing change occurred in this once dominant ideology of economic development. In the marketplace of ideas in the late 1970s few could have predicted that the principle of decentralized economic liberalism would by 1990s triumph so completely over that of centralized of planning and control. Nowhere is this change in economic thinking, although not necessarily in economic practiced, more remarkable than in the centrally planned socialist economies themselves.
2. What is the meaning of Economic Liberalization?
Economic liberalization means the process of opening up of the economy to trade and investment with the rest of the world.
* What is liberalization?
Liberalization (or Liberalisation) refers to a relaxation of government restrictions, usually in areas of social or economic policy.
* What is the meaning of liberalization?
Liberty to establish any kind of economic activity at any time any where in the country without anticipating any kind of so called private or public restrictions. * What is the meaning of globalization?
The process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have became integrated through communication, transportation, and trade. The term is most closely associated with the term economic globalization, as a term, is very often used to refer to economic globalization the integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, the spread of technology, and military presence However, globalization and liberalization of economic convey the same meaning . In general, liberalization (or liberalisation) refers to a relaxation of previous government restrictions, usually in areas of social or economic policy. In some contexts this process or concept is often, but not always, referred to as deregulation. Liberalization of autocratic regimes may precede democratization (or not, as in the case of the Prague Spring). Deregulation is when government reduces its role and allows industry greater freedom in how it operates. The Prague Spring (Czech: Prazske jaro, Slovak: Prazska jar) was a period of political liberalization in Czechoslovakia during the era of its domination by the Soviet Union after World War II. It began on 5 January 1968, when reformist Alexander Dubcek...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document