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.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26512-1_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-65833-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-26512-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)