Economic Prospects for Communist China.

Richard H. Moorsteen

Expert InsightsPublished 1958

A 1958 comparison of the accomplishments of the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China (PRC) in developing heavy industry during the period of each country's First Five Year Plan. The record shows that the Chinese were performing as well as, or perhaps better than, the Russians at a comparable developmental stage. Chinese prospects for fulfilling the goals of the Second Five Year Plan in heavy industry--and for continuing its growth beyond the period of the Second Plan--depended on the ability of the PRC to direct a large share of the nation's output to industrial investment. 58 pp.

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web Only
  • Year: 1958
  • Pages: 58
  • Document Number: P-1298

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Moorsteen, Richard H., Economic Prospects for Communist China. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1958. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P1298.html.
BibTeX RIS

This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.