The term "new economy", or "knowledge economy", or - as is now customary in international economic institutions, including APEC - "knowledge - based Economy" - firmly entered the scientific lexicon in the 90s of the last century. It is precisely with the development of high technologies that remove resource constraints on economic growth and ensure environmentally "clean" economic development that world experts associate the prospects for the development of the world economy. EOS also appears to be the most open - and, moreover, vital-area for global and regional interaction between countries and corporations. As applied to East Asia( VA), the "new economy" zone can become one of the engines of regional integration in the format of the East Asian community.

Theoretical aspects of the problem

Theoretically, the "knowledge economy" is a new factor of production in addition to the traditional ones: the means of labor, the object of labor, and labor itself .1 At the dawn of economic development, the "idea" of how to combine and use the factors of production was as "universal" as the scientific work itself. It was available for repetition due to the relative ease of mastering it. And it wasn't sold. Scientific discoveries were hidden from the competitor in the simplest way - they were simply not introduced into production. Moreover, new ideas did not lead to a decrease, but to an increase in production costs, since-due to the uncertainty of which of the innovations and how exactly it would work - they were higher than the costs of using already familiar technologies.

Today, the situation is changing. In the era of the modern technological revolution, phenomena that did not exist before have emerged: trade in knowledge, patents, licenses, "know-how" and "know-uay". Today, it is not enough just to buy equipment or a production line, you still need to learn how to handle them. The major technological revolution of the late twentieth century forces us to take a fresh look at the factors of production and how they are connected.

Initially, the "idea" of labor was embedded in the object of labor itself, and later-in the means of labor. The current stage of development is characterized by the transformation of science into a direct factor of production, the allocation of the production of" ideas " of labor to a special sector of the economy. The technology trade means that the" idea " of labor is not simply contained in other factors

Vasily V. Mikheev, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Deputy Director of the Institute of Internal Affairs of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

page 138

production, and acts on the market as an independent product. The product "scientific idea of the product" becomes an additional factor of production. Its use significantly speeds up economic development.

The conclusions do not change if we look at the factors of production from a different angle: "labor, land, and capital." Increasing the productivity of each of these factors is associated with the quality of the technologies used, with knowledge and ideas of their use. Even in this case, the" idea " of labor becomes one of the traditional factors of production.

The price of" ideas " of labor is determined by the costs of research labor and the ratio of supply and demand. The" ideas " of the work are based on universal knowledge of fundamental research and applied sciences and act as the final result of development and implementation.

The" ideas " of labor change the relationship between the factors of production. This explains the paradoxical situation, from the point of view of classical economics, when a decrease, for example, in the material intensity of production occurs with an increase in the productivity of living labor and a decrease (and not an increase - as in the "classics") of capital intensity. An explanation for the paradox is easy to find if we include in the costs the cost of the" ideas " of labor embedded in new technologies, which gave such an effect: the decrease in material consumption occurred due to the increase in the knowledge intensity of production.

Considering the place of" ideas " of labor in the economy, it is important to distinguish between those traditional production facilities that use new technologies, and those industries that, in fact, develop these new technologies. Another category of" ideas " of labor - in addition to those that connect the subject of labor and the means of labor-contributes to the most rational use of the labor force itself (its placement, psychological and professional training, etc.).

The fundamental role of knowledge-intensive industries is that they penetrate into other sectors of the economy and make a revolution in them. Another feature of high - tech industries is the abrupt development of the market for their products, sharp fluctuations in prices and costs. From the point of view of the supply-demand ratio, new technologies are not a reaction to the existing demand, but they themselves form, if you will, "impose" it. Another feature of the production of" ideas " of labor is that it requires a skilled labor force capable of independent scientific research-whether in the development or implementation of an idea.

The appearance of "ideas" of labor in the structure of production forces us to take a fresh look at traditional ideas about the industrial development of countries. The fact is that new, super-modern "ideas" of labor have different effects on increasing labor productivity in different areas. There are "aging" industries that are less open to the latest technologies - they may not be long-term development factors, but they are necessary for solving tactical or medium-term tasks. The attitude to such industries is a serious challenge to the development strategy of any state, especially a less developed one: to what extent should their development be stimulated and how to get out of a growth strategy based on technologically "aging" industries? Apparently, multi-factor programs are needed to collapse the latter at the "right" moment. Determining such a moment is also a complex issue of specific policy. For example, labor-saving measures in the material-producing industries are different from those in the processing and assembly industries. Therefore, from the standpoint of national economic efficiency, it is advisable to provide in advance options for switching investment and technological policies to more promising industries in terms of labor savings.

page 139

However, in practice, such challenges are often intractable for developing countries. A solution can be found in the development of regional integration cooperation, provided that a more powerful and technologically advanced economy participates in such an integration initiative. Otherwise, the task of accelerating economic growth due to the factor of" ideas " of labor will always come across not only the weakness of national or regional (without a technological leader) science and technology. But also on the need to meet the urgent needs of the economy and maintain economic growth at the expense of what is already there and" somehow " works - that is, at the expense of "aging" industries.

In the context of interaction between economies of different levels on the "idea" factor of labor, the world economy has developed a "classic ""flying geese" scheme, according to which developed countries dump outdated technologies into less developed ones, and those - into even less developed ones. In this scenario, developing countries either have to spend huge resources (which are usually not available, with the exception of large, though not rich, countries that can concentrate their meager reserves on breakthrough areas like China or India) on their own scientific and technological innovation. Or continue to settle for outdated technologies.

There is no way out of this situation if we continue to operate exclusively on the national level of economic efficiency. Developed countries lack the motivation to transfer the most up-to-date "ideas" of labor to technologically backward countries, and as a rule, backward countries are not able to buy and even more so master them (due to weak infrastructure, lack of training of personnel, and passive national innovation policy). The situation changes if you include the factor of regional (or global) efficiency in the analysis. Regional leaders 'support for the restructuring programs of" aging " industries in less developed countries is also to the benefit of the leaders themselves. Both from the point of view of creating a business environment for high-tech investments, and from the point of view of ensuring the environmental safety of the region.

The need for international integration of the production of "ideas" of labor increases if we are talking about the interaction of several regional (or global) scientific and technological leaders at once. In this case, the national effect of developing regional cooperation and specialization in EOS increases.

Methodological aspects

In international economic institutions, such as the OECD and APEC, a "knowledge-based economy" is defined as an economy in which the production, distribution and use of knowledge are the main drivers of economic growth, well-being and job creation in all its sectors. This definition means that EOS is not just an economy that uses new technologies, but an economy in which all sectors are predominantly knowledge-intensive.

APEC defines a " new economy "as one in which, by combining structural policies with information and communication technologies," the amount of information available to individuals, firms, markets and governments increases, allowing each of them to work more efficiently, paying attention to the skills of employees and requiring greater flexibility. This transformation should result in greater productivity and economic prosperity. " 2

The OECD and APEC distinguish four dimensions of EOS::

- Innovative systems. This means that there is an effective national system of innovation and technological activities: go network-

page 140

government and private institutions that produce, import, modify, and distribute new technologies and new experience in their application.

- Human resource development. This refers to the existence of a highly effective system of education and retraining, which allows a person to acquire new knowledge and skills throughout his life.

Information and communication technologies. It meanscreating an efficient infrastructure that allows individuals and businesses to constantly receive information from all over the world.

- Business environment. The term "business environment" refers to the economic and legal policies of national Governments, as well as the nature of entrepreneurial behavior. The "business environment" should promote the development of innovative activities.

Today, there is no single indicator of the level of development of EOS and its share in GDP .3 According to some criteria that include in the "knowledge-based economy" such industries as high - tech and medium-tech manufacturing, healthcare, education, financial and other business services, and communication services (these industries are defined as "knowledge-based industries" - OO4), EO accounts for about 30% of GDP The United States, Japan, and other developed countries. For developing countries-Thailand, Malaysia, and Mexico-this figure is estimated at 10 percent. 5

When comparing countries in practice, the OECD and APEC use the following specific indicators to "measure" the "knowledge-based economy" (the average indicator for OECD countries in 2001-2003 is given in parentheses)::

Business environment:

- share of "knowledge-based industries" in GDP or value added (37%);

- share of service exports, including commercial services such as transportation, travel, etc., in GDP (12%);

- high-tech exports, which means the export of "knowledge-based industries" - as a share of exports of processed products (19%);

- foreign direct investment as a share of GDP (4.5%);

- government openness coefficient, calculated on the basis of indicators that determine how clearly and openly the government declares its policies (5.5 points on a 10-point scale);

- financial transparency, which means how fully and openly financial institutions report on their activities (6.4 points on a 10-point scale);

- government policy in the field of creating a competitive environment - how much state policy and the legal system protect the economy from unfair competition (6.1 points on a 10-point scale);

- openness, which means the extent to which national protectionism does not interfere with the import of goods and services (7 points on a 10-point scale).

Information and communication technologies:

- number of mobile phones per 1000 inhabitants (680 pcs.);

- telephone lines per 1000 inhabitants (544 units);

- computers per 1000 inhabitants (434);

- number of Internet users (47% of the total population);

- the share of e-commerce in the total volume of trade (0.6%).

Innovative systems:

page 141

- number of researchers per 1000 inhabitants (4.3 persons);

- total expenditures of the public and private sectors of the economy for research and implementation purposes as a percentage of GDP (1.72% of GDP);

- private sector spending on research and implementation as a percentage of GDP (1.04% of GDP);

- annual number of patents registered in the United States per one million inhabitants (2003: 114.06);

- level of development of intercorporate technological cooperation (6 points on a 10-point scale);

- the level of technological cooperation between corporations and universities (5 points on a 10-point scale).

Human resource development:

- the level of secondary education coverage (100% of the total population);

- the level of higher education coverage (28% of the population in the age group from 25 to 34 years);

- share of workers employed in public organizations (28.7%);

- human development index calculated on the basis of three criteria: the ratio of the number of pregnant women to those who gave birth, the level of literacy and school attendance, GDP per capita at purchasing power parity (0.90 points with the maximum possible level of 1.00 points).

The level of development of the" knowledge-based economy " in East Asian countries is 6 (NEA-3, ASEAN-4, CA-3).

The following tables 7 provide indicators that can be used to compare various conclusions about the degree of EOS development in East Asian countries. In the opinion of the author of this work, not all of them fairly reflect the real state of affairs. However, so far in official international statistics there are no other criteria for comparing countries in terms of the degree of development of the "new economy".

Table 1

Business environment

(ratio to the average level of OECD countries, in units, ESR level = 1)

Japan

China

South Korea

Singapore

Hong Kong

Taiwan

Indonesia

Malaysia

Thailand

Philippines

share of "knowledge-based industries" in GDP

0,67

0,01

0,92

1,41

1,08

0,33

0

0,50

0,89

0,29

share of service exports in GDP

0,11

0,22

0,56

2,52

2,10

0,92

0,28

1,28

0,55

0,35

high-tech exports

1,36

1,03

1,53

3,14

1,03

1,61

0,69

2,98

2,97

3,66

foreign direct investment

0,03

0,86

0,17

2,90

3,30

0,72

0

0,14

0,31

0,55

government openness ratio

0,67

0,89

0,69

1,22

0,97

0,97

0,39

1,11

0,75

0,61

financial transparency

0,61

0,67

0,68

1,14

1,30

0,86

0,58

1,00

0,83

0,73

government policy on creating a competitive environment

0,94

0,83

0,86

1,06

1,01

0,81

0,53

1,08

0,97

0,64

openness

0,78

1,03

0,69

1,14

1,28

0,89

0,67

1,02

0,83

0,70

page 142

Statistical analysis of the data in the table shows that in terms of the degree of development of the business environment for expanding the "knowledge-based economy", East Asian countries exceeded the average level of OECD countries in 35% of cases. At the same time, the NEA-3 countries exceeded this level only by 17% of indicators, while the CA-3 countries - by 67%, and the ASEAN-4 countries - by 22%. Of the 8 indicators, Singapore was in the first place for 6, and Hong Kong was in the second place for 2.

Table 2

Information and communication technologies

(ratio to the average level of OECD countries, in units, ESR level = 1)

Japan

China

South Korea

Singapore

Hong Kong

Taiwan

Indonesia

Malaysia

Thailand

Philippines

number of mobile phones per 1000 inhabitants

0,86

0,22

1,00

1,08

1,33

0,39

0,08

0,56

1,22

0,26

phone lines per 1000 inhabitants

1,11

0,25

0,83

0,83

1,06

0,17

0,08

0,39

1,05

0,09

computers for 1000 people.

1,11

0,06

0,81

1,33

1,00

0,8

0,04

0,30

0,72

0,06

number of internet users

1,11

0,11

1,19

1,06

1,06

0,17

0,08

0,56

0,88

0,11

e-commerce share

1,22

0,25

0,97

1,25

0,50

0,19

0,17

1,03

1,19

0,32

As shown in Table 2, in 33% of cases, WA countries exceeded the average level of information and communication technology development in OECD countries. For the NEA-3 countries, this figure is 40% (for Japan and South Korea, excluding China, 67%), for CA-3-55%, and for ASEAN-4-only 12%. Of the 5 indicators, Singapore came in first place 2 times, Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong-one each.

Table 3

Innovative systems

(ratio to the average level of OECD countries, in units, ESR level = 1)

Japan

China

South Korea

Singapore

Hong Kong

Taiwan

Indonesia

Malaysia

Thailand

Philippines

number of scientific researchers per 1000 inhabitants

1,64

0,17

0,67

1,06

0,25

0,08

0

0,11

1,11

0,05

public and private expenses R & D expenditures

1,75

0,64

1,69

1,22

0,32

0,19

0,03

0,28

1,25

0,06

private sector R & D expenditures

2,42

0,58

1,77

1,25

0,16

0,11

0

0,25

1,27

0,04

annual number of patents registered in the United States

2,41

0

0,69

0,64

0,81

0,01

0

0,03

2,57

0

page 143

Japan

China

South Korea

Singapore

Hong Kong

Taiwan

Indonesia

Malaysia

Thailand

Philippines

level of development of intercorporate technological cooperation

1,08

0,64

0,78

1,17

1,08

0,83

0,61

1,03

1,05

0,82

level of technological cooperation between corporations and universities

0,89

0,72

0,81

1,22

1,14

0,84

0,59

1,06

1,13

1,03

Based on the data presented in Table 3, it can be concluded that in terms of the level of development of innovative systems, the VA countries as a whole also exceeded the average level of the OECD in about 35% of cases. NEA-3 countries - 40%, CA-3-40% and ASEAN-4-30%. Of the 6 indicators, Japan was in first place 4 times, Singapore-two.

Table 4

Human resource development

(ratio to the average level of OECD countries, in units, ESR level = 1)

Japan

China

South Korea

Singapore

Hong Kong

Taiwan

Indonesia

Malaysia

Thailand

Philippines

the level of secondary education coverage of the population

0,94

0,58

0,86

0,72

0,69

0,75

0,52

0,66

0,88

0,70

the level of higher education coverage of the population

1,69

0,17

1,44

1,47

1,22

0,47

0,22

0,42

1,36

0,94

percentage of workers employed in the public sector

0,58

0,01

0,67

1,42

1,08

0,31

0

0,51

1,00

0,29

human development index

1,03

0,81

0,97

0,97

0,98

0,83

0,75

0,86

0,99

0,85

In terms of human development indicators, all WA countries exceeded the average OECD level by 23% of the compared figures. NEA-3 countries - 25% each, CA-3-30% each, and ASEAN-4 - 12% each. Of the 4 indicators of human development, Japan was in the lead in 3 cases, Singapore-in one.

If we judge the level of development of the "knowledge-based economy" in East Asia, based on all 23 criteria used in the OECD and APEC, then the CA-3 countries are in the most advantageous position: they exceeded the average level of the OECD by 50% of indicators. For NEA-3, this ratio is about 35% (relatively less developed China reduces the combined indicator), for ASEAN-4 countries, this ratio is more than 30% (due to the" advanced " indicators of Thailand).

Singapore and Japan are absolute leaders in the number of "first places" among the 23 indicators used: 11 and 8 times, respectively. Hong Kong came out on top 3 times, South Korea-once.

Table 5 provides an overview of Russia's place in the Asian "knowledge economy".

page 144

Table 5

Level of development of the "knowledge-based economy" in Russia in relation to the NEA-3 countries

(compare the level of Russia in relation to the level of the OECD, the level of the OECD is taken as one, with the level of NEA-3, in each case of comparison, the level of China, Japan and South Korea to the average level of the OECD countries is taken as one)

Relative to Japan

Relative to China

In relation to South Korea

share of "knowledge-based industries" in GDP

N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

share of service exports in GDP

2,54

1,27

0,30

high-tech exports

0,17

0,40

0,27

foreign direct investment

5,6

0,20

1,00

government openness ratio

0,74

0,56

0,72

financial transparency

0,78

0,71

0,70

government policy on creating a competitive environment

0,48

0,54

0,52

openness

0,70

0,53

0,80

number of mobile phones per 1000 inhabitants

0,20

0,77

0,17

Phone lines per 1000 inhabitants

0,30

1,36

0,41

Computers for 1000 people.

0,15

2,83

0,21

number of internet users

0,15

1,54

0,14

e-commerce share

N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

number of scientific researchers per 1000 inhabitants

0,98

9,4

1,50

public and private expenses R & D expenditures

0,47

1,28

0,48

private sector R & D expenditures

0,41

1,72

0,56

annual number of patents registered in the United States

0,006

...

0,02

level of development of intercorporate technological cooperation

0,65

1,11

0,91

level of technological cooperation between corporations and universities

0,78

0,97

0,86

the level of secondary education coverage of the population

0,74

1,20

0,81

the level of higher education coverage of the population

0,60

5,9

0,70

percentage of workers employed in the public sector

2,20

...

1,901

human development index

0,82

1,05

0,88

With all the conventionality of such comparisons, we can say that the position of Russia against the background of its Far Eastern neighbors is not unambiguous. In 22% of cases, the indicators for Russia that characterize the level of EOS development were higher than those for SBA-3, and in 78% of cases - lower.

In terms of the share of high-tech exports, Russia lags 2.5-5 times behind NEA-3. Indicators of government openness and financial transparency, the effectiveness of policies to create a competitive environment, the availability of mobile phones, and the level of technological integration between corporations and universities are also worse. Russia lags behind Japan and South Korea in 81% of indicators, in particular in terms of the population's equipment with computers, regular telephone lines, Internet access, the level of development of intercorporate technological integration, R & D expenditures, patents registered in the United States, and the human development index. Compared to China, Russia is leading in more than half of the above positions, lagging behind mainly in terms of indicators that characterize the degree of maturity of the business environment, and ahead of China in terms of the development of innovative systems and human potential.

page 145

Potential of cooperative interaction

Cooperation between the WA countries in the field of the " new economy "is mainly carried out on the APEC" platform". The goal of developing scientific and technological cooperation is one of the three main goals of APEC (along with the development and liberalization of trade and investment and individual action plans of countries in the field of liberalization). The main goal is to bridge the scientific and technological gap existing between the APEC countries. In practical terms, priority is given to the following areas of activity::

- creation of a modern infrastructure for the development of EOS, and, first of all, for the development of the national information infrastructure;

- development of human resources - including the introduction of information and telecommunications training in schools and colleges, a system of training during holidays, the practice of retraining the workforce and the education of a behavioral culture based on the "lifelong learning"formula;

- development of new technologies by facilitating access to new scientific and technical developments and adapting existing production facilities to new technologies;

- implementation of an adequate public policy in the field of EOS by improving cooperation between the government and private corporations in the development and implementation of R & D.

The NEA-3 and KA-3 countries, which have great resources and experience in this field, are driving the development of the "new economy" in East Asia. Japan is taking on the role of a financial and technological contributor to the scientific and technological development of the United States with the aim of creating an Asia - Pacific Information Society in the future. South Korea is trying to occupy the niche of a kind of "center of technological development" in WA, financing activities to spread new technologies to regional economies. China strives for leadership in the field of human resource development - it was in 2001, the "year of China in APEC", that Beijing implemented the idea of developing and implementing "Individual Action Plans" in the field of scientific, technological and human development by APEC countries, including the WA countries. Singapore and Hong Kong play the role of regional "islands" of the knowledge - based economy, influencing - through technology exports-the development of EOS in the ASEAN countries and East Asia as a whole.

It is still difficult to assess the results of scientific and technological cooperation in East Asia. Perhaps a new study is needed here, which in 2-3 years will allow us to compare the future level of EOS development in VA with the current one, calculated according to the above parameters.

Today, the East Asian analytical community also has high expectations about the role of new technologies in eliminating the economic lag of regional outsiders from the leaders and the role of East Asian scientific and technological cooperation in bridging the existing cross-country technological gaps in VA. There is also frustration that the region's scientific and technological leaders are not in a hurry and do not really want to invest finance and knowledge in building an integrated "knowledge economy" in East Asia.

* * *

At the same time, it seems that the transformation of "ideas of labor" into a factor of production and the acceleration of the development of the "knowledge economy" in the leading countries of the BA create new prerequisites for the development of regional integration in the BA-

page 146

in Asia, compared to the unification processes in Europe. The conceptual scenario here may be the creation (like Singapore and Hong Kong in a regional context) of national high-tech "islands" (as is already happening in China, South Korea, Malaysia and Thailand) and their unification by common regional "rules of the game" and a coordinated strategy for spreading the" new economy " on a national scale.

Entering the integration structures in East Asia from the" angle "of scientific and technological (as well as financial and energy) cooperation sets both a new vector and a new pace for integration processes in comparison with the traditional scheme: "free trade zone" - "single economic space" - "single currency space" - " single economy". So far, this thesis exists as a working hypothesis. At the same time, it is also supported by the fact that in potentially integrated BA countries - in relation to the "new economy" - there are no traditional obstacles to integration that have historically developed in the "old" economy (for example, agriculture, steel industry, traditional mechanical engineering, etc.).

-----

1. Mikheev V. Countries of COMECON. Alignment of development levels. Problemy i sudeniya [Problems and Judgments], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1989, pp. 64-78.

2. 2003. APEC Economic Outlook. Singapore, 2003. Р.295.

3. The author's position on how these and other economic phenomena can be measured is reflected in his monograph Homointernational. Theory of social development and international security in the light of individual needs and interests". Moscow, 1999. P. 166-181.

4. KBI - Knowledge-based industries.

5. 2003. ARES Economic Outlook. Singapore, 2003. P. 298.

6. The article analyzes the situation in the most developed countries of East Asia: NEA-3 (Japan, China, South Korea), ASEAN-4 (Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines), as well as, relatively speaking, in " China Asia-3 "(CA-3), which includes those located on more than at a higher technological level than the rest of the ASEAN countries, Singapore, as well as Hong Kong and Taiwan.

7. Tables are calculated on the basis of:2003. APEC Economic Outlook. Singapore, 2003. Pp. 300 - 312.

© biblio.vn

Permanent link to this publication:

https://biblio.vn/m/articles/view/EAST-ASIAN-COUNTRIES-AND-THEIR-DEGREE-OF-DEVELOPMENT-OF-THE-NEW-ECONOMY