Search results

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.

The paper aims to examine the reality of, and, conditions for economic growth for former Soviet and Soviet Block economies with special attention to Ukraine and the Russian Federation. Many of these economies' transition from “Communism” remain plagued by problems of institutional design and outcomes characterized by high levels of corruption and low levels of accountability and transparency. The purpose of this paper is to analyze aspects of these socio‐economic realities in the context of contemporary economic theory and ongoing revisions to it.

The type of economic theory used to assess issues of transition has significant implications for public policy. Conventional economic theory has traditionally focused on secure private property rights, competitive markets, inclusive of “flexible” labor markets, as the necessary if not the sufficient conditions to successfully and quickly transition from command style to market economies. Little attention is paid to the details of institutional design. The paper applies a behavioral‐institutional analytical framework to analyze important aspects of failures and successes in transition economies using both economic and governance data sets.

The paper finds that traditional measures of economic freedom are far from sufficient to generate economic growth. Accountability and transparency in governance structures is also required. Economic failure and success are closely connected with overall performance in socio‐economic governance. Also an unnecessary emphasis on low wages, highly constrained social safety nets and labor market policy impedes successful growth and development.

Transition economies' economic performance can be significantly enhanced through improvements in institutional design that facilitates the evolution of high‐wage market economies. The market in and of itself does not suffice to generate successful transitions from command to vibrant market economies.

This paper provides an original exposé and analysis of transition economies from a behavioral‐institutionalist perspective, with important public policy implications.

The study deals with key questions of Serbia’s economic development, including the regularities of transforming self-managed socialism to a standard capitalist system. It is based on the concept of endogenous growth and the general theory of market transition. In the empirical part of investigation, the main directions of economic development and transition in Serbia are analysed. Crucial issues of economic policy are also considered with a particular emphasis on the latest phase of transition. Concerning the problems of economic efficiency, an attempt is made to quantify the various types of technical progress and determine their contribution to its overall rate. The macroeconomic role of external factors is quantitatively shown through a globalisation effect related to inflows of FDI. The author believes that the Serbian economy, despite all its problems and difficulties, in principle has the potential necessary for finding adequate answers to the challenges of ‘neo-transition’. Of these challenges, he regards as most serious Serbia’s ability to comply with the standards of accession to the European Union, which, among others, requires closer regional cooperation.

At the beginning of the 1990s, the Polish economic situation was extremely difficult: high public debt, shortages, high inflation and more than 8,000 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) waiting to be restructured and/or privatised; along with a GDP per capita lower than in Ukraine.

This chapter provides an overview of the Polish economic transition, and presents the results of this process, taking into account four aspects of the changes, i.e. stabilisation, liberalisation, institutional reforms and privatisation. Special attention is paid to intentionally unfinished privatisation and the still significant role of state-owned enterprises, which have remained important economic agents.

Critical analyses were made of the literature dedicated to the economic transition and of the role and characteristics of state-owned enterprises. Empirical evidence is drawn from original datasets about the scale of SOEs in the contemporary economy and rotations in management and supervisory boards in Polish joint-stock companies.

Despite the unfavourable initial conditions, Poland soon emerged as a leader in economic growth, successfully stabilising, liberalising and privatising its economy. The institutional foundations of a democratic market economy were consistently built, and the applications for membership in the OECD, the EU and NATO were an important driver of institutional reforms. In terms of state institutions, political and economic freedom and quality of governance, Poland is more similar to the G7 countries than to the other post-socialist countries, though the need to maintain high-quality state institutions is still a priority. The significant share of SOE is regarded as a challenge of the Polish economy because state-owned enterprises are an object of rent-seeking by politicians and political parties.

The paper investigates the utility of economic theory for post‐Communist economic transformation. It serves to explain the main reasons for market reform failure in different post‐Communist countries.

A literature review suggests that after the collapse of the Communist system there was no economic theory of transition to market. Whenever one considers the transition of post‐Communist economies to a market system (which, in fact, is nothing but post‐Communist transition to capitalist economies), it has to be placed on record, as this kind of transition has no precedent in history.

The main mistake of gradualists stems from their overlooking some very important conditions for successful transition: political guarantees and internal assets for reforms. And the success of shock therapy rests on the paradox, “the worse, the better”.

There is as yet no special economic theory of post‐Communist transformation and it is just developing. This paper helps one to understand the main features of shock therapy and gradualism for designing the framework of such a theory. It is geared towards researchers and students interested in the theoretical aspects of the post‐Communist economic transition to markets.

This paper introduces the readers to Neo-Transitional Economics – a volume which aspires to reinvigorate scholarly interest in transition economics research. The classical transition storyline is briefly revisited, and new directions for empirical and policy-relevant research that target post-transition economies in the post-crisis paradigm are highlighted.

This chapter presents a description of transition economies of Europe focusing different aspects related to the economic development of this area. First, the transition economies are introduced. Later on, political conditions, cultural factors affecting these countries, and economic situation are presented. Referring earlier studies and different factors, a new classification of transition economies is offered.

To have critical perspective, some of the performances of transition economies are compared with BRICS countries, which have been particularly focused as major economies of the emerging markets. Finally, the case countries are presented.

“It should also be noted that the objective of convergence and equal distribution, including across under-performing areas, can hinder efforts to generate growth. Contrariwise, the objective of competitiveness can exacerbate regional and social inequalities, by targeting efforts on zones of excellence where projects achieve greater returns (dynamic major cities, higher levels of general education, the most advanced projects, infrastructures with the heaviest traffic, and so on). If cohesion policy and the Lisbon Strategy come into conflict, it must be borne in mind that the former, for the moment, is founded on a rather more solid legal foundation than the latter” European Commission (2005, p. 9)Adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the Enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Objectives.

Examines critically the promises and dilemmas of capitalist transition and economic transformation in the context of a post‐communist society such as Russia. Discusses the strategies for economic reform, the direction of change and the pace and magnitude of reforms.

Examines the sequencing of economic reforms in the post‐communist transition, focusing on Russia. Proposes a moderately expansionary stabilization, succeeded by gradual liberalization and marketization, followed by a more ambitious economic restructuring and privatization.