INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE OF POST-WAR INDUSTRY RECOVERY
Liudmyla DEINEKO,Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the NAS of Ukraine,Olena TSYPLITSKA,Oksana KUSHNIRENKO,Nataliia GAKHOVYCH,Mariia ZAVGORODNIA,,,,,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2023.06.023
2023-06-28
Economy of Ukraine
Abstract:The contours of policy for macroeconomic stabilization and industrial development that was implemented for post-war recovery by the countries of Europe, Asia, and Africa, which experienced wars and conflicts in the 20th and 21st centuries, are outlined; its historical and economic background is revealed. The factors that determined the industrial revival trajectory in each country are singled out: global, institutional, macroeconomic, resource, innovative and technological, etc. The results of the "Marshall Plan" implementation in European countries and Japan, as well as other types of international aid for the affected countries, are evaluated. The multiplicity of state’s behavioral patterns, which determined the choice of specific direction of industrial revival, is noted: restructuring of industrial sector (Europe), innovative technological modernization (Israel, Asian countries), large industrial projects (Egypt) or the state’s detachment from significant intervention in structural transformations in the economy (Western Balkans countries). The determining role of favorable business climate formation in the post-war period for stimulating the inflow of investments in industrial and other sectors of economy, as well as positive impact of state investments in the development of physical infrastructure and innovation ecosystem, is revealed. It is determined that the post-war recovery of industry took place quickly and had stable results in countries where market principles of economic management and stable institutions were formed (Western Europe); in Asian countries, the recovery process had short-term successes after World War II, but industrial modernization actually took decades due to differences in the economic development strategies of different governments. Insufficient attention of the state to the industrial sector was often the cause of deindustrialization and weak innovative development of the state (Western Balkans countries). It is established that the expected international financial and technical assistance was rarely allocated directly for the support of the industrial sector, which encouraged the states to accumulate their own resources, to preserve the state form of ownership of large industrial objects contrary to the goals of privatization, or to create conditions for attracting foreign investments, forming an export-oriented model of economy.