Can the Developmental State only be achieved by "authoritarian leaning" cultures?

Looking at the readings and the lectures for this week got me thinking about the importance of different cultural values in a country and how this might influence their politics. Specifically, the model of Developmental States. Often it is argued that the prevalence of the developmental state model in Asia is due to Traditional Asian Values among other cultural practices such as power distance which means the population is more willing to have a very powerful state that has a very strong influence over the economy, which may not be as accepted in some more democratically leaning states.

The Developmental State, also known as a hard state, refers to state-led macroeconomic planning in certain countries around the world, often referring to some Asian countries in the 20^th century (Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore). These countries achieved a massive economic gain in short periods of time. In this model, the state has strong intervention, as well as a lot of power over the economy through future planning and extensive regulations. Chalmers Johnson argues that the state’s main goal is economic development and will have the ability to create the policy to achieve that goal, even though it may be perceived as harsh.

Some argue that this Developmental State model is only achievable in states in which the government has a lot of power. Throughout the 20^th century a lot of these countries have had authoritarian leanings that may have given the government the overall control of resources and planning that they needed to put through these regulations. Singapore, a notable example, was led by Lee Kuan Yew (And the People’s Action Party) for three decades and prospered significantly in this time through governmental planning. Similarly, South Korea had a series of brush-ins with military leaders and what some would call authoritarianism throughout the 20^th century which gave the government the power it needed to enact long term macro-economic planning.

Some argue that the prevalence of the Developmental State Model in Asia is due at least in part to the culture of the countries, allowing leaders to make intense long-term economic policy planning. Ideas of Traditional Asian Values (that Asian countries generally value collectivism and traditional Buddhist and Confucian power structures that oppose Western values) and high power-distance (to simplify, the degree to which cultures respect and revere those they feel have more power than them) in these countries creates the cultural base needed for leaders to create long-term economic planning which some have argued has an authoritarian tendency.

However, it is important to note that the Developmental State Model has also been used in Latin America, although this usually occurs at a smaller scale than a nationwide approach. Botswana is also a state that can be described as a developmental state. Therefore, the developmental state is not a specifically Asian model, and the idea of specifically Asian values being needed for the model to be successful can be questioned.

Developmental states, although often requiring very long term planning and large governmental influence, have also been extremely successful at developing economic gain for countries. Also long term economic state planning can diminish the influence of wealthy elites, lessening the sway they have over the state.

References

Amsden, Alice H. "Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization", Oxford University Press, June 1992, Chapter 6

Johnny Sung (2006) Explaining the Economic Success of Singapore: The Developmental Worker as the Missing Link (Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.) Chapter 3, 5 and 8

Leftwich, Adrian, "The Developmental State", Working Paper No. 6, University of York,1994

Milford Bateman, Juan Pablo Duran Ortíz and Kate Maclean 2011. A post-Washington consensus approach to local economic development in Latin America? An example from Medellín, Colombia

United Nations Development Report. 2000. Overcoming Human Poverty: UNDP Poverty Report 2000. New York: United Nations Publications.