Asymmetric Southeast Asian Capacities
(2026) EKHS22 20261Department of Economic History
- Abstract
- This exploratory work investigates the relationship between state capacity and economic resilience across the ASEAN–4 cases: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. The exploration applies the State Capacity as Power (SCP) framework to distinguish between state capacity and interrelated concepts. Congruently, fiscal revenues, bureaucratic human capital, and centralised information are distinguished as the key state capacity resources. Case specific narratives from the 19th century onwards are combined with a two-stage hurdle model to explore how both contraction frequency and contraction severity are affected by state resources, while considering single–PPP and multi-benchmark estimates of GDP per capita levels. Ultimately, the... (More)
- This exploratory work investigates the relationship between state capacity and economic resilience across the ASEAN–4 cases: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. The exploration applies the State Capacity as Power (SCP) framework to distinguish between state capacity and interrelated concepts. Congruently, fiscal revenues, bureaucratic human capital, and centralised information are distinguished as the key state capacity resources. Case specific narratives from the 19th century onwards are combined with a two-stage hurdle model to explore how both contraction frequency and contraction severity are affected by state resources, while considering single–PPP and multi-benchmark estimates of GDP per capita levels. Ultimately, the paper does not establish a robust causal relationship between any state resource and each aspect of economic resilience in the 1950–2025 period, though the state’s fiscal base displays a stronger association in early models, and there is a marked shift in state resource and economic trajectory relationships after 1985. Secondly, the developmental state tradition’s focus on explicitly developmental objectives is validated as important for economic trajectories despite the SCP’s fundamental distinction between policy outcomes and state capacity. Lastly, the differences between GDP specification are substantial, validating further exploration. (Less)
- Popular Abstract
- This exploratory work investigates the relationship between state capacity and economic resilience across the ASEAN–4 cases: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. The exploration applies the State Capacity as Power (SCP) framework to distinguish between state capacity and interrelated concepts. Congruently, fiscal revenues, bureaucratic human capital, and centralised information are distinguished as the key state capacity resources. Case specific narratives from the 19th century onwards are combined with a two-stage hurdle model to explore how both contraction frequency and contraction severity are affected by state resources, while considering single–PPP and multi-benchmark estimates of GDP per capita levels. Ultimately, the... (More)
- This exploratory work investigates the relationship between state capacity and economic resilience across the ASEAN–4 cases: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. The exploration applies the State Capacity as Power (SCP) framework to distinguish between state capacity and interrelated concepts. Congruently, fiscal revenues, bureaucratic human capital, and centralised information are distinguished as the key state capacity resources. Case specific narratives from the 19th century onwards are combined with a two-stage hurdle model to explore how both contraction frequency and contraction severity are affected by state resources, while considering single–PPP and multi-benchmark estimates of GDP per capita levels. Ultimately, the paper does not establish a robust causal relationship between any state resource and each aspect of economic resilience in the 1950–2025 period, though the state’s fiscal base displays a stronger association in early models, and there is a marked shift in state resource and economic trajectory relationships after 1985. Secondly, the developmental state tradition’s focus on explicitly developmental objectives is validated as important for economic trajectories despite the SCP’s fundamental distinction between policy outcomes and state capacity. Lastly, the differences between GDP specification are substantial, validating further exploration. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9246975
- author
- Oliva Vieira, Bernardo LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The Dynamics of State Resources and Economic Shrinkage
- course
- EKHS22 20261
- year
- 2026
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- State Capacity, South East Asian States, Economic Shrinkage
- language
- English
- id
- 9246975
- date added to LUP
- 2026-09-07 13:50:58
- date last changed
- 2026-09-07 13:50:58
@misc{9246975,
abstract = {{This exploratory work investigates the relationship between state capacity and economic resilience across the ASEAN–4 cases: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. The exploration applies the State Capacity as Power (SCP) framework to distinguish between state capacity and interrelated concepts. Congruently, fiscal revenues, bureaucratic human capital, and centralised information are distinguished as the key state capacity resources. Case specific narratives from the 19th century onwards are combined with a two-stage hurdle model to explore how both contraction frequency and contraction severity are affected by state resources, while considering single–PPP and multi-benchmark estimates of GDP per capita levels. Ultimately, the paper does not establish a robust causal relationship between any state resource and each aspect of economic resilience in the 1950–2025 period, though the state’s fiscal base displays a stronger association in early models, and there is a marked shift in state resource and economic trajectory relationships after 1985. Secondly, the developmental state tradition’s focus on explicitly developmental objectives is validated as important for economic trajectories despite the SCP’s fundamental distinction between policy outcomes and state capacity. Lastly, the differences between GDP specification are substantial, validating further exploration.}},
author = {{Oliva Vieira, Bernardo}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Asymmetric Southeast Asian Capacities}},
year = {{2026}},
}