The Political Economy of Industrial Policy Legitimacy: Reconciling State Intervention with Dynamic Competition
South Korea Sangmyung University
Abstract
In recent years, both the EU and the US have revived industrial policy amid challenges like digital dominance, the green transition, and shifting geopolitical dynamics. This paper uses a comparative historical approach to examine the legitimacy of industrial policy across post-WWII development, Cold War tech strategies, globalization, and current initiatives like the CHIPS Act, the EU Green Deal, and the Inflation Reduction Act.
The study finds a move from static to Schumpeterian competition models, reframing legitimacy debates. While concerns about rent-seeking persist, proponents emphasize innovation, externalities, and security. “Hybrid regimes”—industrial alliances and public–private missions—now blend industrial strategy and competition policy.
In the EU, “open strategic autonomy” and new state-aid rules aim to align market logic with strategic needs. In the US, bipartisan support has driven federal reinvestment in critical sectors. The paper argues that legitimacy depends on clear goals, R&D targeting, and institutional reforms that blend expertise with democratic oversight.
Ultimately, it proposes a new framework: industrial policy as “dynamic competition strategy” tied to ecological and security objectives and embedded in multi-level governance.
Keywords:
Industrial policy; Competition; Legitimacy; Innovation; Strategic autonomyCopyright Notice & License:
All articles published in Global Review of Humanities, Arts, and Society (GRHAS) are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows anyone to share, copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work, including for commercial purposes, provided that proper attribution is given to the original author(s) and the source.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PDF Downloads
Journal Info
How to Cite
References
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown Publishing.
Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323–351.
Aghion, P., Boulanger, J., & Cohen, E. (2011). Rethinking industrial policy. Bruegel Policy Brief, 2011/04.
Block, F., & Keller, M. R. (Eds.). (2011). State of Innovation: The U.S. Government's Role in Technology Development. Paradigm Publishers.
Bork, R. H. (1978). The Antitrust Paradox: A Policy at War with Itself. Basic Books.
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. University of Michigan Press.
Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. Anthem Press.
Crouch, C. (2011). The Strange Non-Death of Neoliberalism. Polity.
European Commission. (2021). Updating the 2020 New Industrial Strategy: Building a stronger Single Market for Europe’s recovery. COM(2021) 350 final.
Evans, P. (1995). Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton University Press.
Fligstein, N. (2001). The Architecture of Markets: An Economic Sociology of Twenty-First-Century Capitalist Societies. Princeton University Press.
Gereffi, G. (1999). International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics, 48(1), 37–70.
Hayek, F. A. (1944). The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press.
Khan, M. (2000). Rent-seeking as process. In M. Khan & K. Jomo (Eds.), Rents, Rent-Seeking and Economic Development (pp. 70–144). Cambridge University Press.
Kattel, R., Mazzucato, M., & Ryan-Collins, J. (2018). Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy and Dynamic Capabilities in the Public Sector. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose Working Paper IIPP 2018-05.
Lindblom, C. E. (1977). Politics and Markets: The World’s Political-Economic Systems. Basic Books.
Mazzucato, M. (2013). The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. Anthem Press.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.
Rodrik, D. (2004). Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. CEPR Discussion Paper Series No. 4767.
Rodrik, D. (2007). One Economics, Many Recipes: Globalization, Institutions, and Economic Growth. Princeton University Press.
Rodrik, D. (2022). The return of industrial policy. Project Syndicate. Retrieved from.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper & Brothers.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and Its Discontents. W. W. Norton & Company.
The White House. (2022). CHIPS and Science Act of 2022.
Weber, M. (1919). Politics as a vocation. In H. H. Gerth & C. Wright Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 77–128). Oxford University Press
Weiss, L. (2014). America Inc.Innovation and Enterprise in the National Security State. Cornell University Press.
