ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the effectiveness of industrial policy, and the role of state capacity to implement it, by making a comparison of automotive development in Thailand and Czechia, the largest vehicle producers in Southeast Asia and Central and Eastern Europe, respectively. The development of the industry in both countries primarily relied on foreign investment, despite Czechia’s long earlier history of domestic automotive development. The countries, however, have used very different types of industrial policy. Thailand introduced a series of vertical (sector-specific) industrial policies, pursuing a proactive industrial development strategy with state intervention, continuing even under the restrictions on trade-related policy measures imposed by the WTO since 2000. In contrast, Czechia has employed mostly horizontal (non-sector-specific) industrial policies with less state intervention, influenced by the restrictions of the European Union. Although both countries achieved considerable output and export growth, Thailand has a deeper and more locally owned supply chain. Thailand’s imaginative use of de facto local content requirements in connection with its product champion policy is instructive.

摘要

本文通过比较东南亚和中东欧最大的汽车生产国泰国和捷克的汽车发展，研究产业政策的有效性以及国家能力在实施政策方面的作用。尽管捷克的国内汽车发展历史悠久，但两国汽车行业的发展主要依赖外国投资。然而，这些国家使用了非常不同类型的产业政策。泰国推出一系列垂直（特定部门）工业政策，在国家干预下推行积极的工业发展战略，即使在 2000 年以来世贸组织施加的与贸易相关的政策措施的限制下也继续实施。相比之下，捷克主要采用横向（非特定部门） ) 受欧盟限制影响的国家干预较少的产业政策。尽管两国都实现了可观的产出和出口增长，但泰国的供应链更深、更本地化。泰国在其产品支持政策中创造性地使用事实上的本地内容要求是具有启发性的。