The politics of laissez-faire: Hong Kong's strategy of industrialization in historical perspective

In contrast to other late-industrializers, the colonial state of Hong Kong never pursued, nor even attempted, an interventionist development strategy during Hong Kong’s postwar industrial take-off. In particular, it never interfered with the inter-sectoral flow of resources and did not provide special aid for the development of manufacturing industries. This paper argues that part of the cause of the (comparatively) more thorough adoption of a laissez-faire approach to industrialization can be found in the financial capacity of the state. Both the capitalist and the colonial nature of the Hong Kong state led to a low level of financial capacity. The other condition for laissez-faire in Hong Kong was the particular configuration of the governing coalition. When manufacturing industry was about to ‘sprout’ in the 1950s, the state’s dominant coalition partner was the financial and commercial bourgeoisie while manufacturers occupied a marginal position in the power structure. The second part of this paper attempts to substantiate these contentions by taking a fresh look at two policy episodes surrounding the issues of industrial land and finance. It is argued that in both cases a combination of financial constraints over the state and the alliance between the colonial bureaucracy and the leading commercial and financial bourgeoisie worked to defeat both proposals for state allocation of industrial land at preferential terms (instead of by the market at the going rate through public auctions), and for the establishments of an industrial bank to supply long-term credit to manufacturers. These political defeats of the manufacturers laid the foundation of the laissez-faire strategy and steadfastly steered the state away from an interventionist industrial policy.
香港政府在戰後工業化的歷史中從未推行一套積極干預市場的發展策略。這與大多數後工業化國家的經驗可謂截然不同。其中最顯著的分別是香港政府從不對製造業的發展提供任何有選擇性的援助。本文指出一套比較徹底的自由放任策略所以在香港推行，原因之一在於香港政府的有限財政能力。香港政府的殖民性格及資本家的影響都對港府的財政能力有極大的限制。另一原因則和香港政治中的統治聯盟的組成有關，因為在香港工業起飛的初期，港府的主要聯盟伙伴為金融及商業資本，而工業資本在權力架構中只佔邊緣的位置。為了進一步闡釋財政能力、政商聯盟及發展策略的關係，文章的下半部回顧了五十年代的兩大政策爭論──工業用地的開發與供應及工業銀行的成立。 Copyright © 1994 Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.