1980年中期墨西哥與臺灣先後從國家主導轉向市場主導成長的發展模式，在落實石化市場去管制化之下，因國有石油企業的產權移轉面臨阻礙，兩國轉為推動組織重組為事業體機制。但在政策方向一致下，基於技術官僚的專業知識與對市場理念的認知深淺不同，伴隨各自產業發展的歷史特定脈絡和制度差異，鑲嵌到石化政策內容，造成兩國石化產業發展走向迥異的經濟結果。本研究發現，墨西哥新古典經濟學技術官僚對市場理念的高度推崇，被根深蒂固的石油主義抑制，造成干預失敗；反之，臺灣工程型技術官僚熟悉產業特性與技術內容，並理解逆向整合的產業歷史，因此致力於維繫生產鏈整合。因此，臺灣石化業的經濟表現優於墨西哥。

In the mid-1980s, both Mexico and Taiwan made changes from interventionist state to market-led growth strategies. Despite convergence in the market reform policies, divergence is noted in their economic performances. The argument is made that economic outcomes are determined by the policy principles of technocracies, which are shaped by perceptions of market ideas and development consciousness and constrained by historically specific institutions. The Mexican case shows how a neo-classical economic technocracy can prioritize market ideas, but in a manner that is heavily offset by petroleum-centered ideology. In contrast, Taiwanese engineering technocracy remains development-conscious, projecting technical knowledge to policy-making processes, and using reverse integration history as a niche for forging industrial integration. This is a likely explanation for why Taiwan's petrochemical industry has outperformed Mexico's.