ASEAN Four’s middle income trap dilemma: evidence of the middle technology trap

In Southeast Asia, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are defined by the World Bank as countries that failed to overcome the "middle income trap". The four Southeast Asian countries (hereinafter referred to as the "ASEAN Four") entered the ranks of middle-income economies in the late 1970s and early 1980s and achieved rapid economic development throughout the 1980s and 1990s. However, since the early 2000s, the competitive advantages of these countries’ labor-intensive industries have started to decline, while the process of industrial transformation and technological improvement has been stagnated due to the lack of innovation resources. With limited R&D input and insufficient indigenous tech innovation, these countries’ manufacturing industry show a trend of "deindustrialization" and the "middle technology trap" phenomenon emerged. As the manufacturing sector failed to generate value-added that promotes economic growth and national income increase, ASEAN Four have so far yet to enter the high-income ranks. Drawing from the cases of ASEAN Four, this paper argues that the "middle technology trap" is a key contributing factor to the “middle income trap,” and countries fallen into the “middle income trap” often experience the "middle technology trap" as a concomitant phenomenon. The paper first introduces the industrialization process of ASEAN Four while analyzes the challenges they faced in industrial structural transformation and technology advancement. It then discusses major reasons that these countries failed to step over both the "middle technology trap" and the “middle income trap”, including limited technology spillovers from FDI, R&D investment shortages and insufficient industrial policies, low-quality education system, deficient intellectual property protection and underdeveloped regional capital markets. The paper concludes with some implications for China and discussion on potential future research on distinctions of the “middle technology trap” phenomenon between upper middle-income and lower middle-income countries.