The Role Of Government In Financial Market：A Study of Post-War Taiwan And Korea And 1997 Asian Financial Crisis

• Main Authors: Chih-Wen Chan, 詹智雯
• Other Authors: Cheng , You-Ping
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2003
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/80345192255832039967

碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 公共行政暨政策學系 === 91 === The role of state occupies a significant area in the study of political economy. It is always an important issue how the state influences the market in comparative political economy. Both developmental state theory and the liberal theory offer distinctive viewpoints on this issue. Taiwanese and Korean government have adopted the viewpoint of developmental theory since the end of World War II. The state makes many policies what called〝industry policy〞as an important tool to enhance development in industrialization. Both Taiwan and Korea's subsequent success in economics development became a legendary story as〝the four dragons in Asia〞. The tide of liberalization rose after 1980. Many states began to deregulate the financial market for improving their competitiveness in the global market. So do Taiwan and Korea. Both Taiwan and Korea adopted liberalization policy to deregulate the financial market. However, a major financial crisis broke out in 1997 and it brought damages of various degrees to each and every country in Asia. Why is it that, both being NICs and economic dragons in Asia, Taiwan and Korea exhibited such different outcomes in the aftermath of the 1997 financial crisis？ I discuss the role of state in macro perspective via political economy approach .This thesis includes the role of state in developmental and liberal theory. In the case study section, I review the role state in financial market in post-war Taiwan and Korea in comparative perspective. Also, I compare the financial policies in Taiwan with those of Korea in a historical-structural approach. Using Asian financial crisis as an example, I seek to demonstrate that the adoption and choice of different policy instruments may lead to significantly different economic outcome.