The 1993 World Bank study, in fact, was done only because the Japanese insisted that the bank take a second look at the region. Because the Japanese perspective on the sources of East Asian development was so different from the neoclassical perspective that prevailed at the bank, the study is deeply schizophrenic; on the whole emphasizing the "market-friendly" approach but carefully acknowledging the role industrial policy played in these countries' economies. (U.S. economists Larry Summers--now undersecretary of the Treasury--and Joseph Stiglitz apparently were important influences in moving the study away from a purely market-driven approach.) The approving mentions of industrial policy were clearly intended to appease Japan, which has become a key financial supporter of the bank. Think of them as the equivalent of White House coffee klatches for big donors.