Document Type : Original Article


1 Ph.D. in Public Management, , Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Public Administration, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor Department of Public Administration, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

4 Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran



Active industrial policy is the way that most of today's rich countries achieved their economic growth. However, its effectiveness has been questioned for years because different countries and industry sectors have obtained different results from it and some have succeeded and many others have failed. Therefore, it will be interesting to determine the conditions that lead to the success (failure) of these tools in the industrial policy. One of the most important of these conditions can be found in the context of the industrial policy. Therefore, in this article, by using the case-oriented comparative approach and the method of thematic analysis, the identification of the elements of the industrial policy context in the automobile industry has been addressed. Based on the results of the analysis, these elements can be studied at two levels (1) macro level and (2) industry level. At the macro level, the components of infrastructure and government capacity, ease of trade, size and volume of the economy, stable and attractive business environment, access to markets, good logistics, and innovation environment, and at the industry level, industry size, cost, competition, industry orientation, and support infrastructure are placed. A correct assessment of the current situation based on the identified elements of the policy context in a country and comparing it with other countries will be an important step in the direction of achieving a consistent and effective comparative industrial policy model.


  1. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Du, L., Harrison, A., & Legros, P. (2022). INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND COMPETITION. In A. E. Harrison , & K. E. Maskus, World Scientific Studies in International Economics: Globalization, Firms, and Workers (Vol. 81, pp. 349-380). doi:
  2. Aiginger, K., & Rodrik, D. (2020). Rebirth of Industrial Policy and an Agenda for the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 20, 189-207. doi:
  3. Biesenbender, S., & Héritier, A. (2014). Mixed-Methods Designs in Comparative Public Policy Research: The Dismantling of Pension Policies. In I. Engeli, & C. R. Allison, Comparative Policy Studies: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan.
  4. Jiqiu, R. (2021). Review of the Research of Industrial Policy Theory and Practice. In H. Hanquam, China's Industrial Policy Transformation (pp. 63-96). World scientific. doi:
  5. Lauridsen, L. S. (2021). Industrial policy in the twenty-first century: competing perspectives. In H. Zafarullah, & A. S. Huque, Handbook of Development Policy (pp. 238-248). Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:
  6. Lee, K., & Mao, Z. (2020). GVC (global value chains), industrial policy, and industrial upgrading: Automotive sectors in Malaysia, Thailand, and China in comparision with Korea. European Journal of Development Research.
  7. Natsuda, K., & Thoburn, J. (2021). Automotive Industrialisation: Industrial Policy and Development in Southeast Asia. Routledge-GRIPS Development Forum Studies.
  8. Natsuda, K., Thoburn, J., Blazek, J., & Otsuka, K. (2020). Industrial policy and automotive development: a comparative study of Thailand and Czechia. Eurasian Geography and Economics, p. Article in press. doi:
  9. Schrank, A. (2017). The Political Economy of Performance Standards: Automotive Industrial Policy in Comparative Historical Perspective. Journal of Development Studies, 53(12), pp. 2029-2049. doi:
  10. Warwick K. (2013). Beyond Industrial Policy: Emerging Issues and New Trends. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No.2, OECD Publishing.
  11. Wilder, M. (2021). Industrial policy. In A. Kellow, T. Porter, & K. Ronit (Eds.), Handbook of Business and Public Policy (pp. 309-324). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
  12. Yulek, M A; Lee, K H; Kim, J; Park, D;. (2020). Correction to: State Capacity and the Role of Industrial Policy in Automotive Industry: a Comparative Analysis of Turkey and South Korea. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 20(2), pp. 307-331). doi:
  13. Hejazian, H. (2018). New Industrial Policy: A Look into Theoretical Changes After The 2008 Crisis. Tehran: Sherkat Chap & Nashr e Bazargani. [In Persian]
  14. Kamali, Y. (2018). Methodology of thematic analysis and its application in public policy studies. Iranian Journal of Public Policy 189-208 [In Persian]
  15. Ma'dandar Arani, A., Kakia, L. (2019). Comparative research method in human sciences with an emphasis on education psychology studies. Tehran: SAMT. [In Persian]
  16. McNabb, David. E. (2015). Research methods in public administration and nonprofit management: quantitative and qualitative approaches. Tehran: Saffar. [In Persian]
  17. Saee, A. (2013). Comparative research method with quantitative, historical and fuzzy analysis approach. Tehran: Agah. [In Persian]
  18. Vaezi, R., Shams, L., Maleki, M. (2021). Comparative and development administration, concept, theories and models. Tehran: Saffar. [In Persian]