http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
'스콜라' 이용 시 소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우, 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 9시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.
Under similar initial condition of economic, social and cultural circumstances, Korea and Taiwan could expand their exports and achieve the high performance of economic growth in the process of export-oriented industrialization. In Korea, they let big firms primarily undertake the export, expecting the economies of scale, and faced the structural inequilibrium at the cost of economic growth. However, Taiwan let the small firms mainly undertake the export and made a rapid economic development without any cost of unequal structure. After all, it is necessary to avoid the excessively artificial policy ignoring the market mechanism in excecuting trade policy.
A classical school and scholars like J. Viner and G. Haberler among modern scholars says that international division based on the principle of comparative production cost is still useful for underdeveloped countries. They contends a country which has the comparative advantage of agriculture doesn't need to seek industrialization with sacrifice of agriculture, but must specialize in agriculture. In contrast with this R. Nurkse and R. Prebisch oppose to traditional trade theory and inisist the industrialization of underdeveloped countries. Owing to decreasing demand of the primary product of underdeveloped countries and protection policy of developed countries, they believe that they cannot expect the economic development through agriculture specialization. I think Nurkse' and prehisch's industrialization theory is more realistic in overpeopled backward countries. Because the traditional international trade theory supposing general equilibrium under perfect competitution and perfect movement of factors among industries is not suitable to underdeveloped countries which unemployment is serious, and the importance of dynamic factors is large. In this way if the industrialization of underdeveloped countries is inevitable, which way is more desirable, balanced growth or unbalanced growth? When we think over the situation that capital and resources are insufficient in underdeveloped countries, I think the method of Hirschman's unbalanced approach is more realistic. Even so, in underdeveloped countries which linkage effect among industries is small, the effect of the development of one leading sector may not spread over other industries and bring about the waste of resources. Accordingly it is difficult to try only unbalanced growth.