Sectoral Structure of the Big Three NEA Economies: Tendencies of 2000

ERI FEB RAS	Issue's contents	RUS
	Regionalistica 2024 Volume 11 number 6 pages 105-115

Title of the article	Sectoral Structure of the Big Three NEA Economies: Tendencies of 2000–2022
Pages	105-115
Author	Krivodubova Yulia Valerievna junior research fellow Economic Research Institute FEB RAS 153, Tikhookeanskaya Street, Khabarovsk, Russia, 680042 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ORCID: 0000-0003-1203-2117
Abstract	Based on analysis of the sectoral composition of the GDP of the Big Three NEA countries (Japan, Republic of Korea, China) within the framework of the three-sector model of the economy during the post- industrial development in 2000–2022 the article identifies the trends in changing of primary, secondary and tertiary industries in the GDP structure, gives sectoral structural characteristics of each country’s GDP. It was determined that during the reviewed period China’s economy regardless of the lowest «tertialization» and the sectoral structure close to that one of the world GDP in 1970–1980-s, due to China’s global leadership in certain areas of innovation inter alia, was able not only to bypass the rest of the Big Three NEA countries, but as the world’s second largest economy it also has the smallest lag behind the United States, despite of the ongoing policy of containment towards China. Due to growing complexity of global economic system as well as the trends for reindustrialization and technological race, the need to revise the traditional generally accepted sectoral structure of the economy is identified as a general scientific task.
Code	338+339
DOI	10.14530/reg.2024.6.105
Keywords	post-industrial economy, NEA, Japan, Republic of Korea, China, sectoral structure, service sector, «tertialization» of economy, innovation, reindustrialization
Download	2024-06.105.pdf
For citation	Krivodubova Yu.V. Sectoral Structure of the Big Three NEA Economies: Tendencies of 2000–2022. Regionalistica [Regionalistics]. 2024. Vol. 11. No. 6. Pp. 105–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.14530/reg.2024.6.105 (In Russian)
References	1. Bell D. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. Moscow, 2004. 788 p. (In Russian) 2. Glaziev S.Yu. Theory of Long-Term Technical and Economic Development. Moscow, 1993. 310 p. (In Russian) 3. Gugniac V.Ia. The Economic Thought of J. Fourastie. Voprosy ekonomiki i prava [Issues of Economics and Law]. 2016. No. 6. Pp. 29–36. (In Russian) 4. Silofonova E.V. The Lack of an Innovative Component of the Modern Approaches for Structural Analysis. Fundamental’nye issledovaniya [Fundamental Research]. 2016. No. 7-2. Pp. 392–395. (In Russian) 5. Sukharev O.S. Structural Studies of the Modern Russian Economic School: Basic Approaches and Prospects. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Seriya «Ekonomika» = Perm University Herald. Economy. 2022. Vol. 17. No. 1. Pp. 5–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.17072/1994-9960-2022-1-5-26 (In Russian) 6. Shirov A.A., Porfir’ev B.N., Gusev M.S., Kolpakov A.Yu. Russia Under the Conditions of Global Economy Regionalization. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [World Economy and International Relations]. 2024. Vol. 68. No. 11. Pp. 72–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2024-68-11-72-83 (In Russian) 7. Clark C. The Conditions of Economic Progress. London: Macmillan and Co. Limited, 1940. 515 p. 8. Fisher A.G.В. Production, Primary, Secondary and Tertiary. Economic Record. 1939. Vol. 15. Issue 1. Pp. 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1939.tb01015.x
Financing
Date