Narrow Results

Indonesia, Southeast Asia's most populous state and its largest economy, was deeply affected by the economic crisis of 1997–1998. Its economic contraction in 1998, of over 13%, was the sharpest among all four crisis-affected East Asian economies. This followed three decades of virtually uninterrupted, rapid economic growth. The country's economic crisis was accompanied by regime collapse, resulting in the departure of then President Suharto after 32 years of authoritarian rule. This paper examines the country's socioeconomic development in the decade since the crisis, in the context of the earlier growth, and the very different institutions of economic governance operating under the new democratic regime of weakened central authority and many more economic policy actors. The main conclusions are that growth and macroeconomic stability have been restored surprisingly quickly, but that microeconomic policy and the investment climate are less predictable.

This paper first provides a brief review of the global financial tsunami. It then explains why the quantitative easing in the US and the unique characteristics of the Asian property markets have contributed to the formation of property bubbles in some Asian economies. Thereafter, it discusses the possibility of a bursting of property bubbles in Hong Kong, Singapore or another Asian economy a few years from now, and highlights that the bursting of the property bubble in that economy could trigger severe corrections of property prices in this region through the contagion effect. After pointing out that the implied crisis could be more severe than that during the Asian Financial Crisis, it (i) discusses policies that could mitigate the damages of the potential crisis and (ii) draws important lessons and conclusions that could pre-empt similar disasters in the future.

Due to rigid rules, incomplete institutions and concentration on short-run fiscal discipline, economic and institutional diversity and insufficient reforms caused the progressive segmentation of the Eurozone. Insufficient integration process is due to lack of trust among member countries and the need to keep a hard budget constraint of national budgets to avoid uncontrolled inflationary pressure and moral hazard. Although understandable in the short run, this situation is causing serious economic and social costs and damages to the development of vulnerable countries. The paper enquires possible solutions to this dangerous stalemate, that could also provide useful suggestions for other countries.

This paper considers the sources of employment demand in Asian economies. Using data from the World–Input Output Database, I examine the relative importance of domestic and foreign demand in generating employment. Despite some degree of heterogeneity across the sample, domestic demand is found to be the major driver of employment in all cases. Further, the relative importance of final and intermediate exports in generating employment varies by economy, with some economies relying on intermediate exports to generate employment to a greater extent than others, reflecting their importance as suppliers of intermediate inputs in global value chains, while others rely to a greater extent on final exports, reflecting their role as assemblers within global value chains. Considering developments over time, I find that employment is driven by two offsetting factors: (i) final demand (either domestic or foreign) and (ii) labor productivity, with changes in interindustry structure also being important in the case of intermediate exports.

Cooperatives have been given much-needed attention now by the Indian government through forming a separate Ministry of Cooperation. However, a lot has to be done before taking pride in the same. This chapter emphasises on the cooperative model to promote local institution-building in the post-COVID-19 era. Influenced by the institutional theory, the chapter discusses the gaps at the ground level and also provides suggestions to strengthen the cooperative sector in the country. A case is discussed from the successful dairy cooperatives in India that played a significant role in times of the COVID-19 crisis. The findings of the case discuss the interventions of the cooperatives in generating awareness towards safety, solidarity, accountability, providing stability, maintaining the value chain, securing finances, and supporting community welfare even during the time of the pandemic. Through this, the chapter highlights the cooperatives’ abilities in generating inclusive development in the country even during the time of crisis. This chapter is based on the primary information collected through a qualitative research method that includes in-depth interviews with the cooperative members.