The outcomes of economic change in Southeast Asia

H2 History - syllabus 9174, 2027

How far Southeast Asian countries achieved growth, equity and economic nationalism by 2000, how sustainable their growth was, and what the 1997 crisis revealed.

• Economic growth: national income and output

  Several Southeast Asian economies grew fast enough to be called a "miracle". Others grew slowly or stagnated.

• How sustainable was growth?

  Fast growth rested on foreign money, cheap labour and natural resources. The 1997 crisis showed how fragile it could be.

• Economic equity: poverty

  Growth cut poverty sharply in the fast-growing economies. Poverty stayed high in the Philippines and Burma, and the 1997 crisis reversed some gains.

• Economic equity: income distribution

  Inequality often persisted or grew, between town and country, between regions and between ethnic groups. Malaysia did most to narrow ethnic gaps.

• Economic nationalism: self-sufficiency and control

  Governments gained more control over their economies, but most still relied on foreign money and markets. Countries that pursued self-reliance most strictly paid the highest price.

• Weighing the outcomes

  Most governments achieved growth more fully than equity or economic independence. The aims often had to be traded against each other.

• Put it together: Judge the outcomes

  Choose a country and weigh its growth, equity and economic control.