Rethinking industrial policy
In this paper, Juhász et al. review the most recent research on industrial policies and highlight the new empirical approaches to measurement, causal inference, and economic structure. Some of their conclusions:
- “We argue that there is a generic and powerful economic case for industrial policy and that the usual critiques rely on practical rather than principled objections. In light of this, the authors argue that the debate on industrial policy in economics should not focus on the “whether” (“should governments carry out industrial policy?”) but on the “how” (“how should industrial policy be carried out?).”
- It is no longer appropriate to identify industrial policy with inward-looking, protectionist trade policies as contemporary industrial policies typically target outward orientation and export promotion.
- Industrial policy has been ubiquitous and its prevalence predates the recent rise in its use and prominence in public discussions. It appears advanced economies are heavier users of industrial policies than developing countries.
- Recent research on East Asia’s industrial transformation, which uses disaggregated data and pays careful attention to the diversity of policies, shows a more nuanced picture: certain types of industrial policy were actually powerful in driving structural change in countries such as Japan, South Korea, and China.
[W]e suggest that successful industrial policy often uses a broader range of policies that can be more effective than the classic instrument of subsidies (or of trade policy). These include, importantly, customized public services and inputs that are tailored to firms’ needs and target specific obstacles to productivity enhancing investments. Third, we argue that employment de-industrialization will necessarily reshape the practice of industrial policy, as manufacturing continues to employ fewer workers (relative to the rest of the economy). Policy makers will have to pay more attention to productivity in services, and come up with “industrial” policies that are more suited to services.



The New Economics of Industrial Policy
Authors: Réka Juhász, Nathan Lane, Dani Rodrik
From: University of British Columbia, University of Oxford, Harvard University
A framework for evaluating the effectiveness of industrial policies
In this commentary, Criscuolo and Lalanne spell out two factors that determine the effectiveness of industrial policies. Namely:
- Clear specification of aims of industrial policies and tools: The authors define industrial policy as “the set of interventions intended to improve structurally the performance of the domestic business sector and thus cover instruments ranging from the design of intellectual property protection to public procurement, R&D incentives, or public support to improve workers’ skills.” As for the tools, Criscuolo and Lalanne highlight two types of supply-side instruments: those that primarily improve firm performance (such as tax credits, grants, loans or loan guarantees, and public support for training within firms) and those that affect industry dynamics (such as the tax system, capital and labor market policies, competition or trade policies).
- Ability to measure industrial policy expenditures: transparency and accountability are key in measuring industrial policy expenditures. Towards this end, the OECD is developing a new methodology to gather harmonized data that allow benchmarking industrial strategies across countries in terms of industrial policy expenditures, policy priorities, policy instruments, and recipients. In addition, the methodology provides guidance on which spending to include and which not.
A New Framework for Better Industrial Policies
By: Chiara Criscuolo, Guy Lalanne – OECD