IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ver/wpaper/11-2014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Synthetic ‘Real Socialism’: A Counterfactual Analysis of Political and Economic Liberalizations

Author

Listed:
  • Ilaria Petrarca

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

  • Roberto Ricciuti

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

Abstract

We evaluate the effect of the 1989 shock over economic development in four Eastern European countries. We apply a counterfactual approach and define the shock alternatively as the trigger for economic openness, political competition, or both. The main result is an effect of economic freedom large than the one of democratization. In Poland and Bulgaria we find a positive impact of economic freedom, while in Bulgaria there is also a smaller effect of democratization. In Albania, after an initial recession, economic freedom helps recovery. Finally, Romania does not show any robust effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilaria Petrarca & Roberto Ricciuti, 2014. "Synthetic ‘Real Socialism’: A Counterfactual Analysis of Political and Economic Liberalizations," Working Papers 11/2014, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:11/2014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dse.univr.it/home/workingpapers/wp2014n11.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elias Papaioannou & Gregorios Siourounis, 2008. "Democratisation and Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1520-1551, October.
    2. Giavazzi, Francesco & Tabellini, Guido, 2005. "Economic and political liberalizations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 1297-1330, October.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Suresh Naidu & Pascual Restrepo & James A. Robinson, 2019. "Democracy Does Cause Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 47-100.
    4. Dewatripont, Mathias & Roland, Gerard, 1995. "The Design of Reform Packages under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1207-1223, December.
    5. Barro, Robert J, 1996. "Democracy and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-27, March.
    6. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 2009. "Democratic Capital: The Nexus of Political and Economic Change," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 88-126, July.
    7. Gérard Roland, 2004. "Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets, and Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026268148x, December.
    8. Pauline Grosjean & Claudia Senik, 2011. "Democracy, Market Liberalization, and Political Preferences," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(1), pages 365-381, February.
    9. Paul Brenton & Daniel Gros & Guy Vanadille, 1997. "Output decline and recovery in the transiton economies: causes and social consequences1," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 5(1), pages 113-130, May.
    10. Alberto Abadie & Javier Gardeazabal, 2003. "The Economic Costs of Conflict: A Case Study of the Basque Country," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 113-132, March.
    11. Tavares, Jose & Wacziarg, Romain, 2001. "How democracy affects growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1341-1378, August.
    12. Andreas Billmeier & Tommaso Nannicini, 2013. "Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes: A Synthetic Control Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 983-1001, July.
    13. Dewatripont, M & Roland, G, 1992. "The Virtues of Gradualism and Legitimacy in the Transition to a Market Economy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(411), pages 291-300, March.
    14. Valentina Dimitrova‐Grajzl, 2007. "The Great Divide Revisited: Ottoman and Habsburg Legacies on Transition," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 539-558, November.
    15. World Bank, 2012. "World Development Indicators 2012," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6014, December.
    16. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 2002. "Privatization benefits in Eastern Europe," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 307-324, March.
    17. Barro, Robert J. & Lee, Jong Wha, 2013. "A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 184-198.
    18. Tommaso Nannicini & Roberto Ricciuti, 2010. "Autocratic Transitions and Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 2967, CESifo.
    19. Berta Heybey & Peter Murrell, 1999. "The relationship between economic growth and the speed of liberalization during transition," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 121-137.
    20. John Marangos, 2004. "Was Shock Therapy Consistent with Democracy?," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(2), pages 221-243.
    21. Abadie, Alberto & Diamond, Alexis & Hainmueller, Jens, 2010. "Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(490), pages 493-505.
    22. Bevan, Alan A. & Estrin, Saul, 2004. "The determinants of foreign direct investment into European transition economies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 775-787, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pierre-Guillaume Méon & Khalid Sekkat, 2016. "A time to throw stones, a time to reap: How long does it take for democratic transitions to improve institutional outcomes?," Working Papers CEB 16-016, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Alessandro Melcarne & Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Rok Spruk, 2021. "Democracy, technocracy and economic growth: evidence from 20 century Spain," Working Papers 2118, Banco de España.
    3. Gründler, Klaus & Krieger, Tommy, 2016. "Democracy and growth: Evidence from a machine learning indicator," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(S), pages 85-107.
    4. Tommaso Nannicini & Roberto Ricciuti, 2010. "Autocratic Transitions and Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 2967, CESifo.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Suresh Naidu & Pascual Restrepo & James A. Robinson, 2019. "Democracy Does Cause Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 47-100.
    6. Madsen, Jakob B. & Raschky, Paul A. & Skali, Ahmed, 2015. "Does democracy drive income in the world, 1500–2000?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 175-195.
    7. Felipe González & Mounu Prem, 2020. "Losing your dictator: firms during political transition," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 227-257, June.
    8. Manuel Funke & Moritz Schularick & Christoph Trebesch, 2023. "Populist Leaders and the Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(12), pages 3249-3288, December.
    9. Pauline Grosjean & Claudia Senik, 2011. "Democracy, Market Liberalization, and Political Preferences," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(1), pages 365-381, February.
    10. Matteo Cervellati & Alireza Naghavi & Farid Toubal, 2018. "Trade liberalization, democratization, and technology adoption," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 145-173, June.
    11. Jorge Braga Macedo & Joaquim Oliveira Martins & João Tovar Jalles, 2021. "Globalization, Freedoms and Economic convergence: an empirical exploration of a trivariate relationship using a large panel," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 605-629, July.
    12. Hany Abdel-Latif & Tapas Mishra & Anita Staneva, 2019. "Arab Countries between Winter and Spring: Where Democracy Shock Goes Next!," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Shirleen Manzur, 2022. "Are Elections Enough?," Discussion Papers dp22-05, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    14. Torbjörn Becker & Anders Olofsgård, 2018. "From abnormal to normal : Two tales of growth from 25 years of transition," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 26(4), pages 769-800, October.
    15. Tommaso Nannicini & Andreas Billmeier, 2011. "Economies in Transition: How Important Is Trade Openness for Growth?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 73(3), pages 287-314, June.
    16. Pakhnin, M. & Shapovalov, R., 2023. "Democratic capital and economic growth in the countries of the third wave of democratization," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 12-31.
    17. Eberhardt, Markus, 2022. "Democracy, growth, heterogeneity, and robustness," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    18. Duong, Huu Nhan & Goyal, Abhinav & Kallinterakis, Vasileios & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2022. "Democracy and the pricing of initial public offerings around the world," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 322-341.
    19. Olper, Alessandro & Curzi, Daniele & Swinnen, Johan, 2018. "Trade liberalization and child mortality: A Synthetic Control Method," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 394-410.
    20. Krieger, Tommy, 2022. "Democracy and the quality of economic institutions: Theory and evidence," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-032, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economics of transition; synthetic control estimator; democratization; economic freedom.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • O11 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O43 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Institutions and Growth
    • P27 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist and Transition Economies - - - Performance and Prospects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:11/2014. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael Reiter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isverit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.