---
title: "Industrial Policy & the Great Return of the State"
description: "Understand the global revival of industrial policy, from US legislation to China's flagship strategy, covering theory, instruments and WTO tensions clearly."
url: "https://modeldiplomat.com/learn/lessons/exam-global-economy-industrial-policy-the-return-of-the-state"
---

[New](https://modeldiplomat.com/)

Industrial policy & the return of the state

Read 1 of 4

1/80 XP so far this lesson

Lesson 18 min 20 XP

# Industrial policy & the return of the state

Lesson 12: the global revival of industrial policy—from the US IRA and CHIPS Act to China's Made in China 2025—theory, instruments, WTO tensions and exam application.

## Defining industrial policy

Industrial policy is the deliberate state effort to alter the sectoral composition of an economy—steering resources toward activities judged strategically or developmentally superior to what unfettered markets would select. Its instruments are tariffs and import substitution, directed credit and development banks, subsidies and tax credits, public procurement, state-owned enterprises, local-content rules, research grants, and special economic zones. The intellectual lineage runs from Alexander Hamilton's *Report on Manufactures* (1791) and Friedrich List's *infant-industry* argument (*The National System of Political Economy*, 1841) to the post-war developmental state.

## The developmental-state precedent

The canonical successes are East Asian. Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), analysed by Chalmers Johnson in *MITI and the Japanese Miracle* (1982), coordinated credit and technology across the 1950s–70s. South Korea under Park Chung-hee launched the Heavy and Chemical Industrialization drive (1973), nurturing the chaebol (POSCO, Hyundai, Samsung) through directed lending and export discipline. Taiwan built TSMC out of its state-backed Industrial Technology Research Institute (founded 1973). The World Bank's *The East Asian Miracle* (1993) conceded selective intervention worked where it was disciplined by export performance—the so-called *reciprocal control mechanism* (Alice Amsden, Robert Wade).

## Why it fell from favour—and why it returned

The Washington Consensus (John Williamson, 1989) and the structural-adjustment era treated industrial policy as rent-seeking folly, citing India's License Raj, Latin American import-substitution stagnation, and the calculation problem. Liberalisation, privatisation and deregulation became orthodoxy after 1991.

The return of the state is driven by four shocks. First, China's rise: *Made in China 2025* (announced 2015) targets semiconductors, EVs, robotics and aerospace with state subsidies. Second, the 2008 financial crisis discredited market self-correction. Third, COVID-19 (2020) exposed supply-chain fragility in pharmaceuticals and chips. Fourth, decarbonisation and great-power rivalry made clean-tech and semiconductors national-security questions. The flagship instruments now are the US **CHIPS and Science Act** (signed 9 August 2022, \~$52.7bn) and **Inflation Reduction Act** (16 August 2022, \~$369bn in climate provisions with domestic-content conditions), the EU **Chips Act** (2023) and **Net-Zero Industry Act** (2024), and India's **Production-Linked Incentive (PLI)** schemes (launched 2020, \~₹1.97 lakh crore across 14 sectors). Mariana Mazzucato's *The Entrepreneurial State* (2013) supplied the new intellectual cover, reframing the state as risk-taking innovator behind the iPhone's core technologies.

The analytical question for examiners is not *whether* states intervene but *under what conditions* intervention succeeds. The recurring answer: embedded autonomy (Peter Evans, 1995), sunset clauses, export discipline, and conditionality that punishes underperformers—versus the failure modes of capture, white elephants and fiscal drain.

One question, then back to the lesson

Ask about this lesson