『Summary
　All six large newly industrializing countries (NICs) in this study favored an autarkic industrial policy (AIP) in the 1950s. AIP required, however, the rapid build-up of heavy and chemical industry (HCI) which caused foreign exchange shortage if the HCI matured slowly. This is because the import and subsidy demands of the growing protected HCI sector became too burdensome for the competitive primary sector whose rents shrank in relative importance as the economic structure evolved. The two least well-endowed NICs abandoned AIP early in favor of a competitive industrial policy (CIP) which relied on labor-intensive exports to earn foreign exchange and resulted in rapid economic growth. In contrast, the resource bonus of the four best endowed NICs sustained AIP longer, but the longer AIP lasted the harder it became to reform and the slow-maturing HCI sector adversely affected economic growth. In this way the resource bonus became a curse rather than a blessing.』

1. Explaining divergence in industrialization
2. Resource endowment, industrial policy and economic growth
　(a) Macroeconomic policy
　(b) Industrial policy
　(c) Sectoral sequencing
　(d) The mechanism
3. Competitive industrial policy in Taiwan and Korea
　(a) Early industrial policy liberalization
　(b) Economic performance
4. Low income Asia: India and China
　(a) Implications of autarky for low income countries
　(b) Persistence of autarkic policies
5. Protracted autarkic industrial policy reform: Mexico and Brazil
　(a) Mexican oil postpones reform
　(b) Brazil's economic miracle
6. Conclusion
References