The World Bank Growth Commission published their 2008 report. It’s the report that the economist William Easterly mocked at in his column at the Financial Times.

“My students at New York University would have been happy to supply statements like these [in the report] to the World Bank for a lot less than $4m,” he said.

He further argues that individual freedom, rather than directions from the state or the ‘development experts’, is behind the success of development. He gives examples of an Indian company Wipro, a Brazilian privatised state enterprise Embraer, the South Korean carmaker Hyundai and a former Chinese schoolteacher who becomes a millionaire sockmaker Dong Ying Hong. None of the ‘development experts’, he said, would guess in advance that all of them could be successful, because the recipe of success is ‘freedom for multitudinous individuals to figure out their own answers’.

Yet, Easterly might see that his conclusion is ahistorical. Despite the importance of creative individuals, state policies do play a crucial part. For example, Hyundai would never be able to compete and subsequently become a world class car maker if the South Korean government did not take the initiative to implement selective industrial policies back in the 1980s. We can also say that China’s economy would never be as strong as now if the government did not provide enough facilities and supports for its domestic industries to grow. In addition, the reason why Indonesia is still muddling through the economic crisis is because no one knows where the country, and the government, is heading to.

So, what makes high growth? I would say it’s the result of the state’s effective development strategies and efforts of creative entrepreneurs. Neglecting either of the two would be a failure.

Nevertheless, both Easterly and the Growth Commission are right on two things: (1) there is no what-so-called 'experts' in development, and (2) efforts to find a "one-size-fits-all' policy is a waste of time.