Starting from Professor Kornai’s assertion about the necessity to focus on the long-term perspectives of the transformation process, we analyze in this paper the Lisbon performance of the countries of the European Union from such a long-term, structural perspective. First, we present the 14 Eurostat “structural indicators” and their measurement deficits as well as a debate about the performance of the countries of the EU in geographical terms. We then analyze this Lisbon indicator performance by factor analytical means. Traditional methods of simply adding together the ranks of the different countries along the 14 structural indicators are insufficient, whereas modern multivariate methods like factor analysis are much more appropriate to arrive at conclusions about “combined” performances. We eliminate one of the 14 Lisbon structural indicators – regional dispersion of unemployment rates – from the further debate, because that indicator does not produce ANY data throughout the entire observation period for nine of the 27 EU member countries. We then observe the contradictions between some of the remaining 13 indicators, chosen by the member governments and the European Commission, to measure the Lisbon progress. We conclude that only a Schumpeterian vision of capitalism as a process of “creative destruction” – or rather – “destructive creation” can explain these contradictions, which we empirically reveal in this analysis, and which beset the “Lisbon process” from the very beginning. European decision makers often seem to be unaware about these underlying contradictions, and our paper hopes to clarify the processes involved. We concluded that in reality we are faced with four underlying and contradictory processes of the Lisbon reality 1 a Lisbon productivity factor 2 the avoidance or existence of a high eco-social exclusion 3 the employment performance 4 the neo-liberal European model, which is not clearly and positively linked to the other factors These factors interact in an often contradictory fashion with one another, exactly analyzed in the paper. For Schumpeter and his elitist-conservative visions of society, the decay of values in capitalist society was an all-important element in his pessimistic theory, developed in “Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.” For Schumpeter, the disappearance of the enterprising, male-dominated capitalist family was an all-important element in his theory. We of course strongly reject Schumpeter on this point, but his analysis about the importance of family and household structures as such for capitalist development enters, so to speak, the empirical analysis of European Union socio-political realities via the “back door.” It is not the disappearance of the enterprising capitalist family, which threatens the future of capitalism in Europe, but the often still existing incompatibility of work and family life, which explains more than 60% of Lisbon process failure. We then proceeded to analyze with multiple regression techniques the recent European Commission data on regional growth in Europe. Patterns of discrimination against the young and the elderly on the labor market are incompatible with long-run economic growth. Schumpeter’s observations about the destructive creation inherent in the process of capitalist development, his observations about the sociological limits, which the formation and continuity of capitalist elites encounter in the long-run development of the “market economies” as well as his strong belief in the cyclical nature of capitalist development, are all relevant for the interpretation of our other empirical results. To this end, we analyzed economic growth and development patterns in the world system with UNDP data, using SPSS XIV advanced multiple regression techniques. For one, economic growth in the long run is today strongly determined by the long-run positive effects of foreign direct investments per GDP of the host countries. At the same time – and contrary to the traditional expectations of neo-classical economics – the more short-term effects of heavy foreign direct investment inflows on the host countries of FDI are – ceteris paribus – negative. Transnational corporations do not like an environment of instability, and rather prefer the high-wage, high quality, and high-price economies of the typical West European countries, where their penetration rates of the host countries are highest. The critique in the spirit of Stanford economist Pan Yotopoulos and other social scientists of the drive to lower the comparative international price level, which we discuss at length in this study, is strongly vindicated by our empirical results. Low comparative international price levels, ARE ceteris paribus one of the most important impediments against long-run economic growth. At the same time, it is clear that state sector influence on the economy finds its limits in the post 1989 political economy of the world. However, it is not tax revenue and it is not public health expenditures per GDP, and it is not the priority of human development as a social policy goal over economic growth, but public expenditures in education, which yield the most robust negative (!) effect on the economic growth rate. Also, it can be shown, that public education expenditures are significantly related to high income inequality (differences in the incomes between the richest 20% and the poorest 20%, measured by the so-called quintile ratio). Our empirical, cross-national analysis, based on UNDP data, is also confirmed by our micro-analysis of University performance on a global scale. Indeed, we again show that one of the basic reasons for Europe’s long-term failure to fulfill the Lisbon agenda is the crisis of its public University system. Evaluating the yearly University of Shanghai world university rankings, we conclude that there was a noticeable shift in world university capacity away from Europe towards the US, some English-speaking countries, like Australia, Canada, South Africa and New Zealand, and towards Israel.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number
4616.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation R11 - Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Analysis of Growth, Development, and Changes F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models F5 - International Economics - - International Relations and International Political Economy F2 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: