Skip to main content

How Much Is There To Share? Population, Resources And Productivity

  • Chapter
The Rise of Asia
  • 36 Accesses

Abstract

Although the debate over’ socialism’ often overshadowed purely economic analysis, there was a good economic case for the pessimism expressed in the 1950s and 1960s regarding Asia’s prospects for development. Asia seemed desperately short of the factors which economists identify as contributing to economic growth — the physical resources of land, labour, and capital, and the intangible resources of technology and entrepreneurship. Gunnar Myrdal’s massive three-volume study, Asian Drama (1968), was a classic statement in its pessimistic, nearly despairing tone. Natural resources appeared inadequate, the labour force was overwhelmingly rural and uneducated, and capital seemed to be scarce. Modern technology seemed beyond the capacity of Asian societies, whether because of the shortage of capital, the insufficient supplies of skilled labour, or the inadequate knowledge of both government officials and private capitalists. Finally, Asian societies seemed traditional, unable to provide the supply of vigorous entrepreneurs required by a dynamic economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 1998 Frank B. Tipton

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tipton, F.B. (1998). How Much Is There To Share? Population, Resources And Productivity. In: The Rise of Asia. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26512-1_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics