globalization, social conflict, and economic growth, dani rodrik (1997)

(3, 5-6): in short-- LA vs. E. Asia is not an issue of State interventionism, ISI, what have you--it's a feature of how they deal with turbulence they confront, which is an issue of trade strategy/industrial policy. it's a question of how well you can adjust fiscal/monetary policy

(8): imp--adjustment will be easier where you have institutions of conflict management and smaller social cleavages.

(11): not whether you globalize, but how you globalize

-----

1. fiscal/monetary policy? not underlying competitiveness? export performance? again, this seems to be marred by the same assumptions as Sachs. it's plausible that devaluation will help, i guess, but it can't substitute for success in becoming internationally competitive, surely.