臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：亞洲金融危機的政治經濟分析
作者：呂秋遠
作者(外文)：Chiou-yuan Lu
校院名稱：國立臺灣大學
系所名稱：政治學研究所
指導教授：吳玉山
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2004
主題關鍵詞：亞洲金融危機；政治經濟學；新制度論
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(2) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:88
目前全球景氣雖已逐漸復甦，然而從1997年之後，全球卻陷入長達六年的高度經濟衰退。要理解全球經濟衰退的原因，我們必須從亞洲金融危機開始。本論文因此從1997年的金融危機前亞洲政治經濟發展的情形爲出發點，釐清金融危機發生的原因。在論文中我們首先提出假設，開發中國家的制度變遷主導者（財團或政府）與制度變遷模式（誘導性制度變遷或強制性制度變遷）有密切的相關程度；該制度變遷模式導致制度（金融自由化）改變，制度則使行為模式改變（資金鉅額進出），最後引發事件（金融危機）的出現。其次，我們認為鉅額短期資金進出是導致亞洲金融危機的原因，而亞洲的金融自由化則是讓短期資金得以自由進出的原因。因此，我們如果要找出亞洲金融危機的真正原因，我們就必須印證前述假設，並且探討亞洲的金融自由化屬於何種制度變遷模式，最後則是說明該種制度變遷模式的原因何在。為了證明本文的假設正確，我們在第二章分析四個亞洲金融危機受創最嚴重的國家：馬來西亞、印尼、南韓與泰國；並且提供兩個受創輕微的對照組：中國與台灣。透過這幾個案例，我們可以藉由比較的方式將較重要的因素抽離出來，以建立一個理論性的解釋架構。我們不只要回答亞洲金融危機的成因，本文最終想要回答的問題是：對於新興工業化國家而言，何種制度選擇（institutional choice）會帶來經濟衰退？為什麼該種制度選擇會帶來衰退？
本論文的假設變數有下列幾項：制度變遷主導者、制度變遷模式、制度模式與行為模式等。在新制度論的假設中，制度變遷的主導者有國家（state）與組織（organization）兩種角色，前者可由政府（官僚）代表，後者則可由財團代表；制度變遷模式可以則可將其分為強制性制度變遷（imposed institutional change）與誘導性制度變遷（induced institutional change）。前者會讓制度保持公共財的性質；後者則會讓原屬公共財性質的制度變成私有財。其三則是制度模式，東亞國家的金融制度可分為金融自由化體系與金融封閉體系。前者採取開放金融體制的發展策略，包括馬來西亞（1998年9月以前）、印尼、泰國與南韓都是採取這種策略的國家；後者則是金融封閉模式，包括中國與台灣都是成員。如果我們從現今流行的全球化來看，金融自由化似乎比金融封閉體系符合所謂的經濟效率；然而誘導性制度變遷卻使得出現截然不同的結果，由於誘導性制度變遷會讓金融制度從公共財轉變為私有財，原本希望矯正市場失靈的公共制度不但沒解決問題，反而導致政府失靈。金融自由化成為少數人取得資金進行再投資的工具，而當經濟指標稍微落後，這些原本就不穩定的資金隨即出脫，造成經濟衰退。
在文獻分析中，我們提出制度與非制度因素。所謂制度解釋，是以政治與經濟制度來說明，為什麼不同的新興工業化國家會有不同的經濟表現。非制度性的解釋則是以政經制度之外的因素作為主要的自變項。制度性的解釋包含了金融體制、政權模式與全球化（金融自由化與資本流動）等三大面向。非制度性的解釋則集中於文化條件（族閥資本主義）、總生產力要素與危機前的總體經濟條件等三大範疇。非制度性因素無法解釋金融危機的發生；在制度性因素中，我們也指出危機前的金融體制與政權型態等都不能解釋這些問題。政權能力與金融自由化才是重心所在，也是本論文的主要解釋框架。因此我們以新制度論之中的財產權途徑，探討亞洲各國政府如何與企業互動，以及金融自由化的措施與大量短期資金進出市場的相關性。
我們在第二章分別深入分析馬來西亞、印尼、南韓與泰國四個國家。透過這四個案例，我們發現儘管發展的策略多有不同，但是這幾個國家的誘導性制度變遷卻相當一致，反映出來的制度表現就是金融自由化。以馬來西亞為例，透過新經濟政策，該國從1981年馬哈迪（Mohamad Mahathir）執政之後，經濟成長就逐漸穩定，並且成為東南亞其他國家仿效的新模式。但在此同時，馬來西亞也出現一批新富階級，這些新富階級主要以馬來人為主，到了安華（Anwar Ibrahim）上台以後，依附在安華身邊，爭取產業與金融政策的改變。印尼的情形相當類似，在蘇哈托（Thojib Suharto）前總統的新秩序時期，包括印尼人與華人企業都直接為蘇哈托所用，也從當中取得超額利潤。從1990年之後，兩個國家的誘導性制度變遷更加明顯，金融環境也在國際壓力與利益團體的要求下開放，最後兩個國家先後被金融危機擊垮。馬來西亞在經濟重挫之後，由安華繼續試圖穩住局面；但1年後由於與馬哈迪政策南轅北轍，遭到撤換並下獄。馬哈迪在重新財政大權後，宣布金融鎖國，經濟逐漸恢復正成長。從馬來西亞的情形來看，其完全與國際貨幣基金的要求背道而馳，但採取金融管制卻使經濟體質有機會進行整理。從本文的假設來看，其恰恰取回金融制度與產業政策的主導權。
印尼的情況卻不盡相同，其在遭遇金融危機之後，蘇哈托抵擋不住社會壓力，將權力移交給副總統哈比比；但經濟與種族衝突卻未見起色。此後由瓦希德（Abdurrahman Wahid）繼任總統，但僅僅兩年又由副總統梅嘉瓦蒂（Megawati Sukarnoputri）取而代之。印尼的政治情勢始終不穩定，經濟成長率也停留在低檔。在所有的東南亞國家中，復原的速度最慢。印尼雖然接受國際貨幣基金的要求，但是並沒有積極的針對財團主導產業政策的情形進行改革，在總體經濟環境未改善、金融疆界又持續開放的情形下，經濟狀況始終無法起色。
其三是南韓。其在金泳三（Kim Young Sam）總統任期快結束之時爆發金融危機，取而代之的是金大中（Kim Dae Jung）總統。金大中長年擔任反對派領袖，其與南韓的大財團素無瓜葛，因而有決心與能力進行大刀闊斧的改革。在金大中的改革策略之下，南韓財團被迫分割的例子相當多，對於個別企業，金大中也一改前幾任總統的作法，任其裁員或倒閉。由於南韓嚴厲的改革政策，總體經濟環境已經有起色。從本文的假設來看，南韓的改革方式恰是取回強制性制度變遷的主導權，因而在經濟發展有所建樹。最後是泰國。泰國的情形與其他國家都不相同，其完全遵照國際貨幣基金的藥方改革經濟，但卻也達成分割財團的效果，其經濟的快速復甦，在回應本論文的假設上有相當正面的意義。
第三章我們介紹金融危機受災最輕的兩個國家：中國與台灣。中國在1978年以後採取改革開放政策，但其經濟命脈主要還是以國營企業為主，大規模的財閥還沒有出現的跡象，少數的資本家也還不能掌握國家機器以改變政策。大致上來說，中國未來的經濟走向還是掌握在中國共產黨與官僚的手中；此外，中國的金融環境還是處於封閉的情形。台灣是另外一種情形，在1949年以後，國民黨政府主導的經濟策略並沒有造就一批規模大至足以影響政治的財閥，反而是打造了以中小企業為主的經濟體質。在1990年代之後，在李登輝前總統為維護國民黨政權的策略性考量之下，地方派系與黑金政治才快速滋生；至於金融環境於其他國家來說仍屬相對封閉。我們在第四章針對這兩個國家作案例分析，以作為對照組。從本論文的假設出發，我們可以輕易的理解金融危機為何輕輕掃過這兩個國家，而沒有帶來重大傷害。第四章將亞洲這六個案例過去數十年來發展的軌跡與財團逐漸茁壯的概況進行整體論述，回顧亞洲整體的產業政策與財團發展的關係，並進行跨國性的比較。我們認為亞洲過去的產業政策固然造就了燦爛的經濟成長，卻也造就了一批經濟新貴；其次我們介紹這些新貴如何與政治權貴互動，最後則是探討這些國家的財團如何操縱金融自由化。最後我們會在結論提出金融危機對於亞洲國家經濟發展的教訓與啟示。最後我們會在結論提出金融危機對於亞洲國家經濟發展的教訓與啟示。
The Global business cycle has been recovery gradually. However, the global economy was in depression since 1997. For understanding the reason, we have to trace back Asian Financial Crisis. We assume that the institutional change initiators (interest group or government) and the institutional change patterns (induced institutional change and imposed institutional change) are highly related. The patterns of institutional change lead to institutional changes while the institutions change behavior patterns and finally cause the event. We argue that huge amount of short-term capital flows is the main reason of the crisis. In this dissertation, we examine six empirical cases to illustrate what type of institutional change pattern the Asian financial liberalization is and why the Asian governments adopted the pattern. To prove the hypothesis is correct, we analyze four serious-damaged countries during Asian financial crisis: Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand; while we also discuss two slight- damaged countries: Taiwan and China as comparison. From these cases, we may extract the most important factor by comparative methodology and organize a theoretical framework. The dissertation would like to answer the following questions: For New- Industrialized Countries (NICs), what kind of institutional choice will bring the economic recession and why it brings the depression?
There are several variables in our assumption: the institutional change initiator, the patterns of institutional change, the modes of institution and the behavioral patterns. In the assumption of Neo-institutionalism, the main initiators of institutional change are state and organizations. The former could be government (bureaucrats) and the later may be organizations (interest groups). The patterns of institutional change are imposed institutional change and induced institutional change。The former pattern keeps the institutions remain public while the later transfers institutions into private goods. The following definition is the modes of institution: the financial institutions in East Asia countries could be financial liberalized system and financial regulated system. Malaysia (before September 1998), Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea adopted the developmental strategy and opened the financial boundary; while China and Taiwan adopted the restricted financial openness system. From the view of globalization, the financial liberalization is more efficient than the financial regulated system; however, the way the system changed makes the results different. The induced institutional change will transfer the public good into private one, and the market failure will exist in the market. The financial liberalization becomes the private goods of some specific people to obtain foreign capital. When the economic index became weak, the unstable capital fled and caused economic depression.
We demonstrate the institutional and non-institutional factors to explain Asian Financial Crisis in literature review. The institutional factors illustrate the relationship among political, economic institutions and economic performance in new industrial countries, while the non-institutional factors exclude the political and economic institutional variables. We use financial institutionalism, regime type, globalization (financial liberalization and capital flow)(institutional approach), cultural condition (crony capitalism), total productivity factors and the macroeconomic condition before the crisis (non-institutional approach). In our literature review, we find that the regime capacity and the financial liberalization are the active evidences to explain why the Asian Financial Crisis might happen. The property rights concept of the institutional approach is used to explain how the Asian governments interact with the enterprises and the relationship between the financial liberalization and the short-term capital flows.
In chapter 2, we analyze four cases: Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand. Despite the developmental strategies of these countries are different, they are induced to adopt the same way to ‘liberalize’ the financial boundary. The first example is Malaysia. After Dr. Mohamad Mahathir became the premier in 1981, the government adopted the New Economic Policy (NEP) to stabilize and stimulate economic growth. This new developmental model was imitated by other Southeast Asia countries. Meanwhile, the economic growth creates a new class which is formed by mainly rich Malaysians. After Anwar Ibrahim stepped on the political stage, these people are adherent to Anwar for changing the industrial and financial policies. In 1997, the economic growth was shutdown by the huge amount of capital outflow. In the beginning, the economic power was still controlled by Anwar, but he was not trusted by Mahathir after 1 year because of his agreement with IMF. Mahathir grasped the power again and imposed strict financial regulations. It symbolizes the initiative power for institutional change was switched swiftly from the interest group to the bureaucrats.
The condition in Indonesia is quite similar to Malaysia. Under the period of Thojib Suharto’s ‘New Order’, the Indonesian and Chinese enterprisers are allies of Suharto. After 1990s, the induced institutional changes became significant and the financial boundaries were opened under the pressure of interest groups and international powers. When the economic situation was seriously damaged, Suharto moved his power to the vice president and stepped down. However, the economic, political and racial situations are still in chaos. After B. J. Habibie stepped down, the political succession was still unstable. The opposition party candidate: Abdurrahman Wahid took the presidential position but soon (2 years later) replaced by Megawati Sukarnoputri. The political situation in Indonesia is always disarrayed and the economic growth is low. The Indonesian government accepted the rescue package but it failed to reform the crony structure. Because the interest groups in Indonesia are still in the power to control the institutional change, the economy is still in depression.
The third case is South Korea which was in crisis in the term of Kim Young Sam. After Kim, Kim Dae Jung won the presidential position. He was the leader of the opposition party for the past years before he became the president and has little relationship with the chaebols. Under the determination and action of Kim’s government, the chaebols are divided into small enterprises or shaped into a less scale. He didn’t spend the government budget to save the large individual enterprise. The way South Korea reform is taking back the initial power of institutional change thus improves the economic growth. The last example is Thailand; it reformed the financial structure according to the IMF remedies. The IMF rescue package saved the economic depression and crackdown the crony banking groups. The four examples were positive in response the assumption of the dissertation.
We introduce two slightly damaged countries (Taiwan and China) during the Asian financial crisis in the third chapter. Chinese government started the economic reform after 1978 but the state enterprises are still the main actors in the economic system. There are only few capitalists in China and they can’t influence the state machine to change the government policies. Generally speaking, the future of Chinese economy is still in the control of Chinese communists’ party and the bureaucrats. In other words, the initial power of institutional change remains in the state. The Taiwanese government didn’t create the conglomerates but
While the conglomerates enlarge because of the state’s economic policies, they start to centralize the power into few units (usually families). When the conglomerates gather enough power, they start to share and grasp the economic power from the government. No matter in authoritarian or democratic regimes, they need the support from the centralized conglomerates. Throughout the politicians, they control the decision- making process.
In other words, the Asian developing countries were losing the state autonomy gradually. The financial policies should be the public goods in all countries, while in these countries; they are private goods, only beneficial to few interest groups.
Therefore, the financial liberalization is premature for these countries. If the state autonomy is strong enough, the regimes will close the financial boundary for the reason of state (such as China). However, the financial liberalization is advantageous to the conglomerates for attracting foreign capital. Finally, the banker is on the conglomerates’ side. In Taiwan, the KMT government’s earlier developmental strategies didn’t create conglomerates which could influence politics. The main composition of Taiwanese economy is mid-small scale enterprises. After 1990s, the local fictions and the ‘black- gold’ politics spread speedily while the financial regulations were still strict. We analyze the two cases for understanding why the financial crisis could be controlled under bureaucratic institutional change. The Chapter four will integrate the six cases into the framework. We trace back the Asian industrial policies and the linkage with the development of the conglomerates. The conclusion is that the crony institutional change caused the financial liberalization which leaded the huge amount of capital flows. In developing countries, the institutional change should be under the bureaucratic control .
※中文部分
王紹光、胡鞍鋼，1994，中國國家能力報告，香港：牛津大學出版社。
王曉山譯，貝拉（Robert Bellah）著，1994，德川宗教：現代日本的文化淵源，香港：牛津大學。
王躍生，1997，新制度主義，臺北：揚智。
田弘茂、朱雲漢、Larry Diamond與Marc Plattner編，1997，鞏固第三波民主，臺北：業強。
白欽先，郭翠榮，2001，各國金融體系比較，北京：中國金融出版社。
朱道凱譯，Paul Hirst and Grahame Thompson著，2002，全球化迷思，臺北：群學。
江丙坤，1998，「強化經濟體質的跨世紀策略」，自由中國之工業88（3）：1-13。
江南、許斌、鄒華明譯，安東尼 B. 阿特金森、約瑟夫 E. 斯蒂格茨著，1994，公共經濟學，上海市：三聯。
吳玉山，1995，共產世界的變遷：四個共黨政權的比較，台北：東大。new window
吳玉山，1996，遠離社會主義：中國大陸、蘇聯和波蘭的社會轉型，台北：正中。
吳忠吉，1999，「台灣中小企業的回顧與前瞻」，新世紀智庫論壇7：9-17。
呂秋遠，1999，「國際貨幣基金會金融監理系統之分析」，問題與研究38（10）：32-51。new window
呂秋遠，2000，「政黨理念與政治現實的碰撞：國民黨與民進黨財經政策之比較」，問題與研究39（11）：1-27。new window
呂秋遠，2000，「馬來西亞金融改革之政治經濟分析」，發表於第二屆全國東南亞研究論文研討會，暨南國際大學：25-48。
宋鎮照，1996，東協國家之政經發展，台北：五南。
李治平，2000，「亞洲金融風暴與國外機構投資人之行為與影響」，國立台灣大學財務金融學研究所碩士論文。
杜念中與楊君實（編），1989，儒家倫理與經濟發展，臺北：允晨。
杜維明，1996，現代精神與儒家傳統，臺北：聯經。new window
周育仁，1993，政治與經濟之關係：台灣經驗與其理論意涵，台北：五南圖書公司。
周添城、林志城，1999，台灣中小企業的發展機制，台北：聯經。new window
林秀璘，1999，「亞洲金融危機期間國際股市互動之比較研究」，國立臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
林綾怡，1999，「亞洲金融風暴之傳染效應探討：以台灣為例」，國立臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
唐正儀、邱玉，2002，「金融改革與銀行業發展」，國家政策論壇2（6）：32-38。
馬洪主編，1998，中國市場發展報告1998，北京：中國發展出版社。
張五常，1993，中國的經濟革命，香港：壹。
張光亮，1999，「亞洲金融風暴實證研究：基本面惡化v.s.傳染」，國立台灣大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
張漢裕譯，韋伯著，1974，基督新教的倫理與資本主義的精神，台北：協志工業叢書。
張維安主編，2001，台灣的企業組織結構與競爭力，台北：聯經。
張曙光主編，1996，中國制度變遷的案例研究，上海：上海人民出版社。
張耀秋，1993，「泰國軍事政變後的國會選舉與政局展望」，問題與研究32（2）：50-69。new window
陳惠玲，2001，「銀行業真實逾放比再推估」，貨幣觀測與信用評等27：12-20。
陳鴻瑜，1993，「泰國的軍人與政治變遷」，東亞季刊24（3）：1-18。new window
陳鴻瑜，1996，「從後冷戰時期東亞權力關係之變化：對文化經濟論之批評」，東南亞季刊1（1）：1-12。
曾嘉瑜，2000，「亞洲金融風暴後各國金融改革政策及成效之分析」，國立臺灣大學財務金融學研究所。
馮柄坤等譯，2000，亞洲的企業、政府與社會－金融風暴的前因後果，香港，牛津。
黃世鑫，1998，「金融自由化與國際化（globalization）的省思：重建以國民爲主體的金融制度」，華信金融季刊1：97-108。
董輔礽，2003，中華人民共和國經濟史，香港：三聯。
廖建裕，1998，「東南亞華人：華僑？海外華人？或東南亞人？」，東南亞季刊3（1）：30-45。
齊默，1991，新權威主義：對未來中國大陸命運的論爭，臺北：唐山。
劉永憲，2000，財政學原理，臺北：凱侖。
劉憶如、何佳，1999，東亞十國：金融風暴前與後，台北：商鼎財經。
劉聰衡、謝明瑞編著，1996，金融制度與管理，臺北：國立空中大學。
蔡百銓譯，Robert Cribb and Colin Brown著，1997，印尼當代史，台北：國立編譯館。
寰宇證券投資顧問公司譯，Callum Henderson著，1998，亞洲風暴：金融危機與政經效應，臺北：聯經。
應小端譯，理查‧隆沃思（Richard Longworth）著，2000，虛幻樂園，全球經濟自由化的危機，台北：天下。
聯合報編譯組譯，索羅斯（George Soros）著，1998，全球資本主義危機，臺北：聯經。
顧長永，2000，東南亞政府與政治，台北：五南。
顔子魁，2000，二十一世紀美國經濟之展望，臺北：五南。
※英文部份
Akerlof, George. 1984. An Economic Theorist''s Book of Tales: Essays that Entertain the Consequences of New Assumptions in Economic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Akira, Suehiro. 1989. Capital Accumulation in Thailand 1855- 1985. Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies.
Akyuz, Yilmez (ed.). 1997. East Asian Development: New Perspectives. London: Frank Cass Publishers.
Alagappa, Muthiah (ed.). 1995. Political Legitimacy in Southeast Asia: The Quest for Moral Authority. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Alba, Pedro, Leonardo Hernandez and Daniela Klingebiel. 1999. Financial Liberalization and the Capital Account: Thailand, 1988-1997. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Ali, Syed Husin (ed.). 1984. Ethnicity, Class and Development, Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Persatuan Sosial Sains Malaysia.
Amsden, Alice. 1991. “Big Business and Urban Congestion in Taiwan: The Origins of Small Enterprise and Regionally Decentralized Industry” World Development, 19: 1115-1127.
Ariff, Mohamed and Ahmed M. Khalid. 2000. Liberalization, Growth and the Asian Financial Crisis: Lessons for Developing and Transitional Economies in Asia. New York: Edward Elgar.
Ariff, Mohamed and Nicolas Groenwold. 1998. “The Effects of De-Regulation on Share-Market Efficiency in the Asian-Pacific.” International Economic Journal, 12(4): 22-32.
Asian Development Bank. 1998. Key Indicators of Developing Asian and Pacific Countries. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Asian Development Bank. 1999. Rising to the Challenge in Asia: A Study of Financial Markets, Volume 1, An Overview. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Backman, Michael. 1999. Asian Eclipse: Exposing the Dark Side of Business in Asia. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
Bank for International Settlements. 1998. 68th Annual Report. Basel: BIS.
Bank for International Settlements. 1998. International Banking and Financial Market Developments. Basel: BIS.
Bank Negara Malaysia.1997. Annual Report. Kuala Lumpur: Bank Negara Malaysia.
Bank of China. 1999. 1998 Annual Report. Beijing: Bank of China.
Bank of Korea. 1999. Annual Report. Seoul: Bank of Korea.
Beger, Suzanne and Ronald Dore (eds.). 1996. National Diversity and Global Capitalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Bell, Daniel, A. Brown, Kanishka Jayasurya and David Martin Jones. 1995. Towards Illiberal Democracy in Pacific Asia. London: Macmillan.
Biddle, Jesse and Vedat Melor. 1999. Consultative Mechanisms and Economic Governance in Malaysia. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Bird, Kelly, April. 1998. “Concentration in Indonesian Manufacturing.” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 35 (1): 45-62.
Blustein, Paul. 2001. The Chastening: Inside the Crisis that Rocked the Global Financial System and Humbled the IMF. Washington D.C.: IMF Public Affairs.
Bresnan, John. 1993. Managing Indonesia: The Modern Political Economy. New York: Columbia University Press.
Budiman, Arief, Barbara Hatley and Damien Kingsbury (eds.). 1998. Reformasi: Crisis and Change in Indonesia. Clayton, Australia: Monash Asia Institute.
Bunbongkarn, Suchit, February. 1992. “Thailand in 1991, Coping with the Military Guardianship.” Asian Survey, 32(2): 125-139.
Callon, Scott. 1995. Divided Sun: MITI and the Breakdown of Japanese High-Tech Industrial Policy, 1975-1993. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Calvo, G.A. and Morris Goldstein. 1996. Private Capital Flow to Emerging Markets after the Mexican Crisis. Washington D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Campos, Emilio and H.L. Root. 1996. The Key to the Asian Miracle: Making Shared Growth Credible. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Caprio, Gerard Jr. and Dimitri Vittas. 1997. Reforming Financial Systems: Historical Implications for Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Caprio, Gerard, Izak Atiyas and James Hanson (eds.). 1996. Financial Reform: Theory and Experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carnoy, Martin. 1993. The New Global Economy in the Information Age. Penn: Penn State University.
Casserley, Dominic and Greg Gibb. 1999. Banking in Asia: The End of Entitlement. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
Chang, Ha-joon, Hong Jae Park and Chul Gyue Yoo. 1998. “Interpreting the Korean Crisis: Financial Liberalisation, Industrial Policy and Corporate Governance.” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 22: 735-746.
Chang, Ha-joon. 1998. “Korea: the Misunderstood Crisis.” World Development, 26(8): 1555-1561.
Cheng, Tun-jen and Stephan Haggard. 1992. Political Change in Taiwan. Boulder: Lynne Reiner.
China Economic Yearbook Editorial Board. 1998. Economic Statics Yearbook of China 1997. Beijing: Economic Management Press.
China Economic Yearbook Editorial Board. 1999. Economic Statics Yearbook of China 1998. Beijing: Economic Management Press.
China Securities Regulatory Commission. 1998. China Securities and Futures Statistical Yearbook 1998. Beijing: China Financial and Economic Publishing House.
China Securities Regulatory Commission. 1999. China Securities and Futures Statistical Yearbook 1999. Beijing: China Financial and Economic Publishing House.
Chinese Finance and Banking Society. 1999. Almanac of China’s Finance and Banking 1998. Beijing: Editorial Board of the Almanac of China’s Finance and Banking.
Cho, Yoon-Je and Deena Khatkhate. 1989. Lessons of Financial Liberalization in Asia: A Comparative Study. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Cho, Yoon-Je. 1999. Financial Liberalization and Crisis in Korea. Seoul: Bank of Korea.
Citizen’s Coalition for Economic Justice. 1993. Coalition for Social Justice. Seoul: Citizen’s Coalition for Economic Justice.
Claessens, Stijn, Simeon Djankov and Daniela Klingebiel.1999. Financial Restructuring in Asia: Halfway There? Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Claessens, Stijn, Simeon Djankov and Larry Lang. 1998. East Asian Corporates: Growth, Financing and Risks over the Last Decade. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Clifford, Mark. 1998. Troubled Tigers: Businessmen, Burecrats, and Generals in South Korea. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Coase, Ronald. 1960. “The Problem of Social Cost.” Journal of Law & Economic, 3: 1135-1156.
Cole, David and Betty Slade. 1996. Building a Modern Financial System: The Indonesian Experience. Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Cole, David and Betty Slade. 1998. “Why Has Indonesia’s Financial Crisis Been So Bad?” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 34(2): 62-74.
Cole, David and Yung Chul Park. 1983. Financial Development in Korea, 1945-1978. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Cole, David, Hal Scott and Philip Wellons (eds.). 1995. Asian Markets. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dean, James. 1998. “Asia’s Financial Crisis in Historical Perspective,” Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 3(3): 72-87.
DeGlopper, D.R.. 1995. Lukang: Commerce and Community in a Chinese City. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Delhaise, Philippe. 1998. Asia in Crisis: The Implosion of the Banking and Finance System. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
Demirguc-Kunt, Asli and Enrica Detragiache. 1998. Financial Liberalization and Financial Fragility. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Dessus, Sebastian, Jia-Dong Shea, and Mau-Shan Shi. 1995. Chinese Taipei: the Origins of the Economic "Miracle". Paris: Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; Washington, D.C.: OECD Publications and Information Center.
Diaz- Alejandro, Carlos. 1985. “Good- Bye Financial Repression, Hello Financial Crash” Journal of Development Economics, 19: 1-16.
Drysdale, Peter (ed.). 2000. Reform and Recovery in East Asia: The Role of the State and Economic Enterprise. London: Routledge.
Eklof, S.. 1999. Indonesian Politics in Crisis: the Long Fall of Suharto 1996-98. Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies.
Evans, Peter. 1995. Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University.
Felker, Greg and Kwame Jomo. 1999. New Approaches to Investment Policy in ASEAN 4. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaysia.
Fields, Karl (ed.). 1995. Enterprise and the State in Korea and Taiwan. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Fry, Maxwell. 1988. Money, Interest, and Banking in Economic Development. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Fujio, Hara (ed.). 1994. The Development of Bumiputera Enterprises and Sino- Malay Economic Cooperation in Malaysia. Tokyo: Institute of Developing Economies.
Fung, K.C.. 1998. Trade and Investment: Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
Galenson, Walter. 1985. Foreign Trade and Investment: Economic Development in the Newly Industrializing Countries. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Gao, Haihong. 2000. Liberalising China’s Capital Account: Lessons Drawn from Thailand’s Experience, Visiting Researchers Series No.6. Singapore Southeast Asian Studies Institute.
Gates, Henry. 1996. China’s Motor: A Thousand Years of Petty Capitalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Gerschenkron, Alexander. 1962. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Mass: Harvard University.
Godement, Francois. 1999. The Downsizing of Asia. New York: Routledge.
Goldstein, Morris. 1998. The Asian Financial Crisis: Causes, Cures, and Systemic Implications. Washington D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Goldstein, Morris. 2000. Carmen Reinhart and Graciela Kaminsky, Assessing Financial Vulnerability: An Early Warning System for Emerging Markets. Washington D.C.: Institute of International Economics.
Gomez, Edmund Terence and Kwame Jomo. 1997. Malaysia’s Political Economy: Politics, Patronage and Profits. New York: Cambridge University press.
Gomez, Edmund Terence and Kwame Jomo. 1999. Malaysia’s Political Economy. New York: Cambridge University press.
Gomez, Edmund Terence, 1996. “Electoral Funding of General, State and Party Elections in Malaysia,” Journal of Contemporary Asia, 26(1): 81-99.
Gomez, Edmund Terence. 1990. Politics in Business: UMNO’s Corporate Investment. Kuala Lumpur: Forum.
Gomez, Edmund Terence. 1991. Money Politics in the Barisan Nasional. Kuala Lumpur: Forum.
Gomez, Edmund Terence. 1994. Political Business: Corporate Involvement of Malaysian Political Parties. Townsville: Centre for East and Southeast Asian Studies, James Cook University of Northern Queensland.
Gomez, Edmund Terence. 1996. The 1995 Malaysian General Election: A Report and Commentary. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian.
Gomez, Edmund Terence. 1999. Chinese Business in Malaysia: Accumulation, Ascendance, Accommodation. London and Honolulu: Curzon and University of Hawaii Press.
Gourevitch, Peter. 1986. Politics in Hard Times. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Gustav, Rais and Mahmood Syed. 1992. The Political Economy of Development Policy Change. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Haggard, Stephan and Chung-in Moon. 1990. “Institutions and Economic Policy: Theory and a Korean Case Study” World Politics, 42: 210-237.
Haggard, Stephan and Robert Kaufman (eds.). 1992. The Politics of Economic Adjustment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Haggard, Stephan and Robert Kaufman. 1996. Transitions to Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Haggard, Stephan, C. Lee and S. Maxfield (eds.). 1993. The Politics of Finance in Developing Countries. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Haggard, Stephan. 1990. Pathway from the Periphery. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Haggard, Stephan. 2000. The Political Economy of the Asian Financial Crisis. Washington D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Hamilton-Hart, Natasha. 1999. Indonesia: Reforming the Institutions of Financial Governance?. Canberra: Australian National University.
Harwood, Alison, Robert E. Litan and Michael Pomerleano (eds.). 1999. Financial Markets and Development: The Crisis in Emerging Markets. New York: The Brookings Institution.
Hertz, Noreena. 2002. Silent Takeover: Global Capitalism & the Death of Democracy. New York: Free Press.
Hewison, Kevin (ed.). 1997. Political Change in Thailand: Politics and Participation. New York: Routledge.
Hewison, Kevin, Richard Robison and G. Rodan (eds.). 1993. Southeast Asia in the 1990s: Authoritarianism, Democracy and Capitalism. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Hewison, Kevin. 1989. Bankers and Bureaucrats: Capital and State in Thailand. New Haven: Yale University Southeast Asian Monographs.
Hicken, Allen. 1999. Parties, Politics and Patronage: Governance and Growth in Thailand. CA: University of California, San Diego.
Hill, H. 1995. “Small- Medium Enterprise and Rapid Industrialization: The ASEAN Experience,” Journal of Asian Business, 11: 1-8.
Hill, Hal. 1999. The Indonesian Economy in Crisis: Causes, Consequences and Lessons. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asia Studies.
Hoa, Tran Van and Charles Harvie (eds.). 2000. The Causes and Impact of the Asian Financial Crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hong, Zhihua.1998. Laws and Regulations on Foreign Exchange Management: Explanation and Illustration. Beijing: China’s Law Press.
Hoong, Khong Kim. 1991. Malaysia’s General Election 1990: Continuity, Change, and Ethnic Politics. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asia.
Horseman, M. and A. Marshall. 1994. After the Nation State. London: Harper Collins.
Huang, Y. and Y. Yang. 1998. “China’s Financial Fragility and Policy Responses,” Asian Pacific Economic Literature, 13(2): 1-13.
Hunter, William C., George G. Kaufman and Thomas H. Krueger (eds.). 1999. The Asian Financial Crisis: Origins, Implications, and Solutions. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Huntington, Samuel P.. 1968. Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University.
IMF Staff. 1997. International Capital Markets: Developments, Prospects and Key Policy Issues. Washington D.C.: IMF.
IMF Staff. 1999. News Brief: IMF Board Completes Korea Review. Washington D.C.: IMF.
IMF Staff. 2000. Republic of Korea: Statistical Appendix. Washington D.C.: IMF.
Jackson, Karl D.. 1999. Asian Contagion: The Causes and Consequences of a Financial Crisis. Boulder: Westview.
Jefferson, G. H., T. Rawski and Y. Zheng. 1992. “Growth, Efficiency and Convergence in China’s State and Collective Industry.” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 40(2): 181-208.
Jefferson, Gary and I. Singh. 1999. Enterprise Reform in China: Township, Transition and Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jessed, D.. 1976. Planning a Dual Economy: the Case of Thailand. Wetherby, W. Yorks: The British Library.
Johnson, Chalmers. 1983. MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975. Stanford: Stanford University.
Johnson, Juliet, March. 1994. “Should Russia Adopt the Chinese Model of Economic Reform?” Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 27(1): 54-67.
Jomo, Kwame (ed.). 2001. Southeast Asia’s Industrialisation. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Jomo, Kwame and Greg Felker (eds.). 1999. Technology, Competitiveness and the State. London: Routledge.
Jomo, Kwame, Greg Felker and Rajah Rasiah (eds.). 1999. Industrial Technology Development in Malaysia. London: Routledge.
Jomo, Kwame. 1986. A Question of Class: Capital, the State and Uneven Development in Malaya. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
Jomo, Kwame. 1990. Growth and Structural Change in Malaysian Economy. London: The McMillian Press.
Jomo, Kwame. 1994. U-Turn? Malaysian Economic Development Policies after 1990. Cairns, Australia: Centre for Southeast Asian studies, James Cook University.
Jomo, Kwame. 1995. Privatizing Malaysia: Rents, Rhetoric, Reality. Co: Westview Press.
Kahler, Miles (ed.). 1998. Capital Flows and Financial Crisis. Ithaca: Cornell University.
Kahn, Haider.1999. The Problem of Transition from Family-Based Corporate Governance in East Asia. Manila: Asian Development Bank Institute.
Kang, David. 2002. Crony Capitalism: Corruption and Development in South Korea and the Philippines. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Khan, Mushtaq (ed.). 2000. Rents, Rent-Seeking and Economic Development: Theory and Evidence in Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Kim, Alexander Joungwon. 1975. Divided Korea: The Politics and Development 1945- 1972. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kim, Young C.. 1997. The Southeast Asian Economic Miracle. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
King, Daniel E. 1997. “Thailand in 1996, Economic Slowdown Clouds Year,” Asian Survey, 37(2): 152-170.
Kitamura, Kayoko and Tsuneo Tanaka. 1997. Examining Asia''s Tigers: Nine Economies Challenging Common Structural Problems. Tokyo: Institute of Developing Economies.
Krugman, Paul. 1994. “The Myth of Asian Miracle.” Foreign Affairs. 73(6): 62-78.
Krugman, Paul. 1999. The Return of Depression Economics. New York: Norton.
Kunio, Yoshihara. 1994. The Nation and Economic Growth, The Philippines and Thailand. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
Lan, Yisheng. 1997. The Stock Market in China: Problems and Prospects for Domestic and Foreign Investment. Australia: Chinese Economic Research Centre, The University of Adelaide.
Laothamatas, Anek (ed.). 1997. Democratization in Southeast and East Asia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Laothamatas, Anek. 1992. Business Associations and the Asian Political Economy of Thailand. Co.: Westview Press.
Lardy, Nicholas. 1998. China’s Financial Sector: Evolution, Challenges, and Reform. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Lardy, Nicholas. 1998. China’s Unfinished Economic Revolution. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institute.
Lau, Lawrence J. (ed.). 2000. Econometrics, Vol. 2: Econometrics and the Cost of Capital. Mass: MIT Press.
Lee, Hock Lock. 1987. Central Banking in Malaysia: A Study of Financial and Monetary Management. Singapore: Butterworths.
Lin, Justin Yifu. 1989. “An Economic Theory of Institutional Change: Induced and Imposed Change.” Cato Journal, 9: 1-33.
Lingle, Christopher. 1996. “Confucian Corporatism and Authoritarian Capitalism in East Asia.” The Pacific Review, 9(3): 398-410.
Lingle, Christopher. 1998. The Rise and Decline of the Asian Century. Hong Kong: Asia 2000.
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1959. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy.” American Political Science Review, 56: 321-325.
LoGerfo, James and Montinola Gabriella. 1999. Thailand: Episodic Reform, Regulatory Incapacity and Financial Crisis. CA: University of California, Davis.
London, Bruce. 1980. Metropolis and Nation in Thailand: the Political Economy of Uneven Development. Co.: Westview Press.
Ma, Hong (ed.). 1990. Modern China’s Economy and Management. Beijing: Foreign Language Press.
MacIntyre, Andrew (ed.). 1994. Business and Government in Industrialising Asia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
MacIntyre, Andrew and Kanishka Jayasuria (eds.). 1992. The Dynamics of Economic Policy Reform in South-east and South-west Pacific. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
MacIntyre, Andrew. 1991. Business and Politics in Indonesia. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
MacKinnon, Ronald. 1973. Money and Capital in Economic Development. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
MacKinnon, Ronald. 1991. The Order of Economic Liberalization: Financial Control in the Transition to a Market Economy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Malaysia National Economic Action Council. 1998. National Economic Recovery Plan: Agenda for Action. Kuala Lumpur: National Economic Action Council.
Marsh, Ian, Jean Blondel, and Takashi Inoguchi (eds.). 1999. Democracy, Governance, and Economic Performance: East and Southeast Asia. New York: United Nations University.
Masuyama, Seiichi, Donna Vanderbrink and Chia Siow Yue (eds.). 1999. East Asia’s Financial System. Singapore: Nomura Research Institute and Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Maxfield, Sylvia and Ben Ross Schneider (eds.). 1997. Business and the States in Developing Countries. Ithaca: New York: Cornell University Press.
McDonald, Hamish. 1980. Suharto’s Indonesia. Australia: The Dominion Press.
McKendrick, David. 1992. “Obstacles to Catch Up: The Case of Indonesian Aircraft Industry.” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 28(1): 39-66.
McMillan, Charles. 1996. The Japanese Industrial System. New York: de Gruyter.
Meyanathan, S.D. (ed.). 1994. Industrial Structures and the Development of Small and Medium Enterprise Linkages. New York: Work Bank, EDI Seminar Series.
Migdal, Joel S.. 1988. Strong Societies and Weak States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Moody, Peter R.. 1988. Political Opposition in Post-Confucian Society. New York: Praeger.
Moody’s Investors Service. 1999. China: Banking System Outlook, the Start of a Long March. New York: Moody’s Investors Service.
Morell, D. and Chai-Anan Samudavanija. 1981. Political Conflict in Thailand: Reform, Reaction, Revolution. Cambridge: Oelgeschlger, Gunn & Hain.
Morley, James (ed.). 1993. Driven by Growth: Political Change in the Asia-Pacific Region. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Nam, Sang-Woo. 2000. Korea’s Economic Crisis and Corporate Governance. Seoul: Korea Development Institute.
Neher, Clark. 1996. “The Transition to Democracy in Thailand.” Asian Perspective, 20(2): 312-320.
Noble, Gregory W. and John Ravenhill (eds.). 2000. The Asian Financial Crisis and the Architecture of Global Finance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nyaw, Mee-Kau and Chang Chak-Yan (eds.). 1989. Chinese Banking in Asia’s Market Economics. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Ockey, James Soren. 1992. Business Leaders, Gangsters and the Middle Class. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
OECD Public Management Service. 1996. Globalisation: What Challenges and Opportunities for Government?. Paris: OECD.
Ohmae, Kenichi. 1995. The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies. London: HarperCollins.
Okimoto, Daniel. 1989. Between MITI and the Markets. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Overholt, William. 1999. “Thailand’s Financial and Political System: Crisis and Rejuvenation.” Asian Survey, 39(6): 35-42.
Park, A. and B. Johnston. 1995. “Rural Development and Dynamic Externalities in Taiwan’s Structural Transformation.” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 7: 239-266.
Park, Sang Yong. 1998. Financial Reform and Its Impact on Corporate Organization in Korea. Seoul: Yonsei University.
Park, Se-Il. 1999. Labor Market Policy and the Social Safety Net in Korea: After 1997 Crisis. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Park, Yung Chul. 1998. Financial Liberalization and Opening in East Asia: Issues and Policy Challenges. Seoul: Korea Institute of Finance.
Pathmanand, Ukrist. 1998. “The Thaksin Shinawatra Group: A Study of the Relationship between Money and Politics in Thailand.” Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies, 13: 78-92.
Patrick, H. & Y.C. Park. 1999. The Financial Development of Japan, Korea, Taiwan: Growth, Repression and Liberalization. London: Oxford .
Phongpaichit, Pasuk and Chris Baker. 1998. Thailand’s Boom and Bust. Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Phongpaichit, Pasuk and Sungsidh Piriyarangsan. 1994. Corruption and Democracy in Thailand. Bangkok: Political Economy Centre, Chulalongkorn University.
Phongpaicit, Pasuk and Chris Baker. 1995. Thailand: Economy and Politics. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.
Piriyarangsan, Sungsidh and Pasuk Phongpaichit (eds.). 1993. The Middle Class and Thai Democracy. Bangkok: Political Economy Centre, Chulalongkorn University.
Przeworski, Adam. Michael E. Alvarez, Jose Antonio Cheibub and Fernando Limongi (eds.). 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Qi, Luo. 1998. Economic Interests v.s. Political Interventions: The Case of Economic Relations between Mainland China and Taiwan. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. and Singapore University Press.
Qi, Luo. 1999. China’s Industrial Reform and Open-Door Policy, 1980-1997: A Case Study from Xiamen. Hampshire, U.K.: Ashgate Publishing.
Quinn, Dennis.1997. “The Correlates of Change in International Financial Regulation.” American Political Science Review, 91(3): 531-551.
Radelet, Steven. 1998. “Indonesia’s Implosion.” Harvard Asia Pacific Review, 2(2): 80-92.
Rains, Gustav and Paul Schultz (eds.). 1988. The State of Development Economics: Progress and Perspective. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Reischauer, Edwin. 1974. “The Sinic World in Perspective,” Foreign Affairs, 52(2): 341-348.
Robinson, Richard and David Goodman (eds.). 1996. The New Rich in Asia. London: Routledge.
Robinson, Richard. 1986. Indonesia: The Rise of Capital. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Robison, Richard .1996. “The Politics of Asian Values.” The Pacific Review, 9(3): 309-321.
Robison, Richard and D. Goodman (eds.). 1995. The New Rich in Asia. Mobile Phones, MacDonalds and Middle-Class Revolution. London: Routledge.
Robison, Richard, Mark Beeson, Kanishka Jayasuiya and Hyuk-Rae Kim (eds.). 2000. Politics and Markets in the Wake of Asian Crisis. New York: Routledge.
Rodan, Gary (ed.). 1996. Political Oppositions in Industrialising Asia. London: Routledge.
Sankaran, Ramanathan and Mohd Hamdan Adnan. 1988. Malaysia’s 1986 General Election: The Urban- Rural Dichotomy. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Schopf, James. 2000. The End of Political Bank Robbery in the Republic of Korea. California: University of California, San Diego.
Schwarz, Adam. 1994. A Nation in Waiting: Indonesia in the 1990s. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Schwarz, Adam. 1999. A Nation in Waiting: Indonesia’s Search for Stability. St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Searle, Peter. 1999. The Riddle of Malaysian Capitalism: Rent-Seekers or Real Capitalists?. Sydney and Honolulu: Allen & Unwin and University of Hawaii Press.
Shaw, Edward. 1973. Financial Deepening in Economic Development. New York: Oxford University Press.
Soesastro, Hadi and Chatib Basri. 1999. “Survey of Recent Development.” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 34(1): 1-15.
Song, T. and Z. Wei (eds.). 1996. Multi-Dimensional Thinking on Promoting State Enterprise Reform by 40 Economics. Beijing: Economics Science Press.
Stephan Haggard, Chung H. Lee, and Sylvia Maxfield (eds.). 1993. The Politics of Finance in Developing Countries. New York: Cornell University Press.
Strange, Susan. 1996. The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tan, Gerald. 2000. The Asian Currency Crisis. New York: International Specialized Book Services.
Taylor, Robert (ed.). 1996. The Politics of Elections in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Thomson, G.F. (ed.). 1998. Economic Dynamism in the Asian-Pacific. London: Routledge.
Tien, Hung-mao (ed.). 1996. Taiwan’s Electoral Politics and Democratic Transition. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Timmer, Peter (ed.). 1991. Agricultural and the State. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Vichyanond, Pakorn. 1994. Thailand’s Financial System: Structure and Liberalization. Bangkok: Thailand Development Research Institute.
Vittas, Dmitri (ed.). 1992. Financial Regulation: Changing the Rule of the Game. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Wade, Robert. 1991. Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wee, Vivienne and Kanishka Jayasuriy. 2002. New Geographies and Temporalities of Power: Exploring the New Fault Lines of Southeast Asia. Singapore: Southeast Asia Research Centre Working Papers Series 30.
Weiss, Linda. 1998. The Myth of the Powerless State: Governing the Economy in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity.
West, James.1997. “Martial Lawlessness The Legal Aftermath of Kwangju.”Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal, 6(1): 85-168.
Winters, Jeffrey. 1996. Power in Motion: Capital Mobility and the Indonesia State. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Woo-Cumings, Meredith (ed.). 1999. The Developmental State. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
World Bank. 1993. The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University.
World Bank. 1997. Annual Report－1996. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
World Bank. 1998. East Asia: The Road to Recovery. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Yamazawa, Ippei (ed.). 1999. International Symposium on the Asian Economic Crisis and its Impact on Trade and Investment. Tokyo: Institute of Developing Economies; Japan External Trade Organization.
Yoo, Seong Min. 1999. Corporate Restructuring in Korea: Policy Issues before and during the Crisis. Seoul: Korean Development Institute.
Zhang, Peter G., C. Anthony, and C. Goh. 1999. IMF & the Asian Financial Crisis. World Scientific Publishing Co..
Zysman, John. 1983. Government, Markets, and the Growth. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：639（臺灣：627，外國：12） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1827278 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67619650
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上