Kicking away the ladder: Infant industry promotion in historical perspective
Abstract
This article introduces a new dimension in the debate on infant industry promotion by pointing out that, historically, the developed countries themselves did not develop on the basis of free trade policy and laissez-faire industrial policy that they currently recommend to, or even force upon, the developing countries. It first critically examines the "official history of capitalism", which sees the last few centuries as a continuous, if sometimes disrupted, advance of the free trade system. Then it shows how virtually all of today's developed countries, especially the UK and the USA, the supposed homes of free trade, used tariff protection and subsidies to develop their industries when they were in catching-up positions. It then criticizes the orthodox counter-argument that, while using protection in the early days of their economic development, today's developed countries never used it as much as today's developing countries have done. Finally, pointing out that the supposedly "good" policies of free trade and laissez-faire industrial policy have led to a collapse in growth in the developing countries during the last two decades, the article argues for a total rethink on trade policy and, more broadly, development strategy, for developing countries. Above all, it recommends that the global rules need to be rewritten in such a way that developing countries are allowed more actively to use tariffs and subsidies for infant industry promotion in accordance with their development…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Discounting current efforts could add justification to claims that an environmentalist agenda is being used to slow down Brazil's development by 'kicking away the ladder'.
“Moreover, discounting current efforts could add justification to claims that an environmentalist agenda is being used to slow down Brazil's development by 'kicking away the ladder' (Chang, 2003).”
From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Chang, 2003
Cites
Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis
Pierson, P. (2004) · doi:10.1515/9781400841080 · Cited by 4,957 · see citing works
Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration
Sachs, J. D., Warner, A., Aslund, A., & Fischer, S. (1995) · Brookings Papers on Economic Activity · doi:10.2307/2534573 · Cited by 4,950 · cited 1× · see citing works
“According to the “official history of capitalism” that informs today’s debate on globalization and economic development, the world economy developed in the following way over the last few centuries (see, e.g. Bhagwati, 1985, 1998; Sachs & Warner, 1995).”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil
Mammadova, A., Behagel, J., & Masiero, M. (2020) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.03.008 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chang, H.-J.
- Corresponding author
- Chang, Ha-Joon
- ORCID
- Chang, Ha-Joon
- Venue
- Oxford Development Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-32
- ISSN
- 0264-5491 (ISSN-L)
- 1360-0818
- 1469-9966
- OpenAlex
- W1972126835
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 6.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford Development Studies (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Asian Industrial and Economic Development
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economic Theory and Policy
- Keywords
- infant industry protection, protective tariffs, industrial subsidies, free trade, development strategy, catching-up economies, trade policy, global trade rules, economic growth, history of capitalism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review