Government decisions mattered most, because they decided how countries used their conditions and their outside opportunities.
Domestic conditions set the opportunities and limits, such as oil wealth or the lack of a home market.
External conditions created chances and shocks: Cold War aid, the oil boom, Japanese investment and the 1997 crisis.
Government strategies decided how countries responded. Singapore and Malaysia used foreign investment to industrialise, while Burma shut itself off. Thailand and the Philippines were similar in size and both mainly rural. Yet Thailand's stable, business-friendly policies brought fast growth, while the Philippines under Marcos wasted its borrowing on cronies.
Private businesses turned policy into production, but they worked within the rules that governments made.
A strong essay shows how these factors interacted. It compares at least three countries to show why similar conditions led to different results.
- Conditions
- Set opportunities and limits.
- External
- Chances and shocks.
- Government
- Decided responses; mattered most.
Worked example: Building a comparative judgement
Which factor shaped economic change most?
- Criterion: which factor explains the different results of similar countries?
- Thailand and the Philippines: similar size, different results.
- Explanation: government choices.
- Judgement: government mattered most, within conditions it could not control.
Watch out for this
External conditions decided everything.
All countries faced the same world economy, but their results differed widely. Government choices explain much of that difference.
Check your understanding
Why compare Thailand with the Philippines in an essay on factors?
- They were similar in size and both mainly rural, but their policies and results differed.
- They had identical histories.
- Neither economy changed at all.