Search results

The Eastern and Western worlds are diametrically opposed to each other not only politically and militarily but also economically and socially. In the socialist lands the communist one‐party system is dominant; in the West it is political pluralism, in Comecon the planned economy prevails, and in the Common Market and the USA it is the market economy, of course, although not in the form it took in the nineteenth century. From a social point of view the Eastern bloc guarantees full employment at a lower standard of living, in the market economy the higher standard of living is accompanied by structural, cyclical unemployment. Each system claims to be superior to the other.

This paper aims to determine the status of the socialist market economy through a logical analysis of the evolution of economic systems in human society.

This paper presents an analysis of uncertainty and the functions performed by different economic systems in managing and resolving it, thereby explaining the evolutionary rationale behind economic system evolution.

Firstly, the socialist market economy empowers the market to play a decisive role in resource allocation, which serves as the foundation for activating individuals' motivation to engage in economic activities. Secondly, the socialist market economy adheres to the basic socialist economic system, which is the basis for the socialist market economy to stabilize the economy and society or to address the risk of economic uncertainty that may trigger macro-level inconsistencies in economic operations. Thirdly, the advantages of a socialist market economy in adapting to economic uncertainties do not arise spontaneously and must be exerted through continuous improvement of the socialist market economy.

The innovation of this paper lies in introducing uncertainty to clarify the logic behind the evolution of economic systems in human society and explaining the typical significance of the socialist market economy and its advantages in accommodating and resolving uncertainty.

Extensions/applications/revisions of the Marxian vision of socialism can broadly be categorized into two polar strands: the centralized and the decentralized strands of socialist economic systems. Explores the main postulates of a decentralized version of a socialist economic system as provided by Kautsky, Luxembourg, Bernstein, Bukharin and Lange. The centralized strand of socialist economic systems has been elaborated drawing mainly from the writings of Lenin, Trotsky, Dobb, Sweezy and Baran.

The equation of unified knowledge says that S = f (A,P) which means that the practical solution to a given problem is a function of the existing, empirical, actual realities and the future, potential, best possible conditions of general stable equilibrium which both pure and practical reason, exhaustive in the Kantian sense, show as being within the realm of potential realities beyond any doubt. The first classical revolution in economic thinking, included in factor “P” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of a model of ideal conditions of stable equilibrium but neglected the full consideration of the existing, actual conditions. That is the main reason why, in the end, it failed. The second modern revolution, included in factor “A” of the equation, conceived the economic and financial problems in terms of the existing, actual conditions, usually in disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium (in case of stagnation) and neglected the sense of right direction expressed in factor “P” or the realization of general, stable equilibrium. That is the main reason why the modern revolution failed in the past and is failing in front of our eyes in the present. The equation of unified knowledge, perceived as a sui generis synthesis between classical and modern thinking has been applied rigorously and systematically in writing the enclosed American‐British economic, monetary, financial and social stabilization plans. In the final analysis, a new economic philosophy, based on a synthesis between classical and modern thinking, called here the new economics of unified knowledge, is applied to solve the malaise of the twentieth century which resulted from a confusion between thinking in terms of stable equilibrium on the one hand and disequilibrium or unstable equilibrium on the other.

This paper aims to discuss the important and changing role of personal networks for transformation in Russia, and the related challenges for management. Formal institutions supporting the transformation to a market economy have been weak and Russian managers still tend to rely on personal networks. While these networks are important in all economies, they play a different role in full‐fledged market economies than in planned economies.

The paper is conceptual and is based on literature on the nature of markets, the Soviet planned economy, and the transformation process in Russia. A business network approach is used to understand markets and focus on the dynamics of overlapping business and personal networks.

Overlapping between business networks involving non‐Russian networks and between personal and business networks are important drivers of transformation. The challenges for management in Russia are both organizational and strategic, and transformation implies substantial changes in the network structures.

The authors recommend further empirical analysis of the role that the overlapping of business and personal networks plays in transformation, as well as its managerial implications.

This paper shows why firms must build business relationships during transformation that are integrated in nature and in which personal relations support the technical, logistical, financial, and knowledge exchange dimensions.

This paper challenges the dominating view of transformation, which says that market exchange is transactional, impersonal, and competition‐driven. The paper analyzes transformation in Russia as a network overlapping process in which the role of personal relations changes.

Analysis of selected segments of the Polish economy reveals several spheres of inequality. Some of them, such as inequalities in wages or household assets, are found in every type of economy. However, some inequalities are specific to a centrally planned economy, for example, those in the sphere of decision making and those resulting from a twofold attitude towards various forms of ownership.

The purpose of this paper is to illuminate change processes in Vietnam, China, and the USSR.

“Policy ethnography” may be used to examine the emergence of policy rationalities that may or may not be locally feasible. Through the use of a conceptual heuristics to interpret practice, this paper contrasts approaches in the development of “conservative” transition rationalities suited to the shift from plan to market whilst retaining a ruling Communist Party in power. Comparison is made between Vietnam, where a successful “conservative” transition occurred, and a failed policy experiment in the Soviet Union. The discussion extends to China, where, as in the case of Vietnam, a policy‐oriented policy rationality of transition may be observed.

Through the use of a conceptual heuristics to interpret practice this paper, contrasts approaches in the development of “conservative” transition rationalities suited to the shift from plan to market whilst retaining a ruling Communist Party in power. Comparison is made between Vietnam, where a successful “conservative” transition occurred, and a failed policy experiment in the Soviet Union. The discussion extends to China, where, as in the case of Vietnam, a policy‐oriented policy rationality of transition may be observed.

Further research into the development of conservative policy rationalities in other context is advised.

The paper concludes that attaining a successful heuristics amongst policy consumers is likely a necessary condition of a managed conservative transition, and that this heuristics does well to define system changes as a process, rather than a discrete step, in constructing a cognitive basis for policy rationality.

The paper consistently avoids realist arguments about policy, which would suggest judgments as to whether policy is “correct” or “incorrect”, and focuses upon the creation of policy rationalities.

China's economic reform has brought about dramatic changes in the marketing environment. In this paper, several new features of the marketing environment in China are identified by examining the process and results of the reform. The paper concludes that the market has become a dominant factor in China's economy, but the effect of the old planned system still exists, conflicting with the new market system and making the marketing environment more complicated.

Expanding and developing the theoretical implications of socialist market economy with China’s experience.

In the course of exploring the development of a market economy, China has given full play to the advantages of the socialist system, which has distinguished itself from the Western countries and some of its developing peers. China's market economy is not directly transplanted and copied from the West. China not only insists on growing its market economy but also unswervingly sticks to the socialist orientation of its market economy.

So far, the socialist market economy has proved to be more effective than the conventional one-sided, planned economy and also outperforms the capitalist market economy.

The socialist market economy has surpassed the conventional planned economy and the capitalist market economy – it is a reconstructed and reshaped mechanism and system as well as a successful and new path of market economy explored by China through reform and opening up, rather than a counterpart of Western market economy or the simple combination of socialism and market economy.

The last decade of this century has witnessed the transition of the formerly centrally planned economies of Europe and Asia to market economies, a process affecting some 1.7 billion people in 28 countries. While much agreement exists on the sorts of reform measures required, disagreement exists over their sequencing. The economic and social performance of these transition economies has varied considerably and for a variety of reasons, however China’s performance, in particular, has been outstanding. The paper reviews the reform measures required for economic transition, and alternative sequencing approaches to these reforms. It conducts an overview of the performance of the transition economies, with focus placed upon the experience of the Chinese economy. An analysis of China’s approach to economic reform, its key components, major outcomes and outstanding issues are discussed. Key lessons to be derived for other transition economies from China’s experience are also presented.