IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/1346.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linking competition and trade policies in Central and Eastern European countries

Author

Listed:
  • Hoekman, Bernard M.
  • Mavroidis, Petros C.
  • DEC

Abstract

The authors explore options for Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) governments to make competition law enforcement more sensitive to trade and investment policy, thereby supporting liberal trade policy. The competition laws of these countries tend to resemble European Union (EU) competition disciplines (Article 85 - 86 of the Treaty of Rome), but give competition authorities great scope for discretion in interpreting the relevant statutes. Much can be done through appropriate wording of criteria and implementation guidelines within the framework of existing legislation to subject trade policy to competition policy scrutiny. A liberal trade policy and active enforcement of competition laws will be crucialnot only for national welfare, but also for eliminating the threat of contingent protection by EU firms. When CEE countries face antidumping threats or action from EU countries, the authors suggest that they seek a link between competition law enforcement and antidumping investigation in the context of the association agreements with the European Union. That is, the European Commission could be asked to apply competition policy criteria in antidumping investigations against products originating in CEE countries, ensuring that there is a threat to competition, not just a threat to a European Union competitor. This treatment could be sought informally during the transitional period. Generally, since the CEE countries have adopted competition legislation comparable to that of the European Union, it seems safe to assume that if they enforce their competition laws vigorously, EU consistent minimum standards will be respected. Until the association agreements are fully implemented, it is important to reduce to a minimum the risk of being treated as an"unfair trader."Safeguard actions will remain possible until EU membership has been attained. But safeguard protection is more difficult to seek and obtain if there is only a weak case for arguing that Central and Easter European firms are benefiting from trade barriers, state aids, or various government maintained entry barriers.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoekman, Bernard M. & Mavroidis, Petros C. & DEC, 1994. "Linking competition and trade policies in Central and Eastern European countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1346, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1994/08/01/000009265_3970716141629/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hay, Donald, 1993. "The Assessment: Competition Policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, Summer.
    2. Sapir, Andre & Buigues, Pierre & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1993. "European Competition Policy in Manufacturing and Services: A Two-Speed Approach?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 113-132, Summer.
    3. Jacquemin, Alexis, 1990. "Horizontal concentration and European merger policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(2-3), pages 539-550, May.
    4. Gray, C.W., 1993. "Evolving Legal Frameworks for Private Sector Development in Central and Eastern Europe," World Bank - Discussion Papers 209, World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin, Philippe, 1996. "A sequential approach to regional integration: The European Union and Central and Eastern Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 581-598, December.

    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. Gordon L Clark & Paul Bennett, 2001. "Dutch Sector-Wide Supplementary Pensions: Fund Governance, European Competition Policy, and the Geography of Finance," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(1), pages 27-48, January.
    2. Ciaran Driver, 2000. "Capacity Utilisation and Excess Capacity: Theory, Evidence, and Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 16(1), pages 69-87, February.
    3. Simon Johnson & Andrei Shleifer, 1999. "Coase v. the Coasians," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1885, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    4. Hsu, Bo-Xiang & Chen, Yi-Min & Yan, Ting-Yu, 2021. "Industrial targeting and firm performance: An integrated approach to industry selection," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    5. Shinkle, George A. & Hodgkinson, Gerard P. & Gary, Michael Shayne, 2021. "Government policy changes and organizational goal setting: Extensions to the behavioral theory of the firm," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 406-417.
    6. Ross C. Singleton, 1997. "Competition Policy For Developing Countries: A Long‐Run, Entry‐Based Approach," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, April.
    7. Andrianova, Svetlana, 2004. "Decentralisation and the perceived quality of institutions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 77-82, April.
    8. Bernard Hoekman & Pierre Sauvé, 1994. "Regional and Multilateral Liberalization of Service Markets: Complements or Substitutes?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 283-318, September.
    9. Cepec, Jaka & Grajzl, Peter, 2020. "Debt-to-equity conversion in bankruptcy reorganization and post-bankruptcy firm survival," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    10. Claude d'Aspremont & Massimo Motta, 2000. "Competition, coordination and anti-trust policy," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 37(1), pages 141-154.
    11. Josef C. Brada, 1996. "Privatization Is Transition--Or Is It?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 67-86, Spring.
    12. Janusz A. Ordover & Russell W. Pittman & Paul Clyde, 1994. "Competition policy for natural monopolies in a developing market economy1," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 2(3), pages 317-343, September.
    13. Eleanor J . Morgan, 1997. "European Community Merger Policy in the Service Industries: The Second Phase," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 626-651, October.
    14. Jackie Krafft, 2000. "Introduction to the process of competition," Post-Print hal-00212278, HAL.
    15. Jeffrey B. Miller & Kenneth Koford, 2005. "Contract Enforcement in the Early Transition to a Market Economy," Working Papers 05-11, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    16. Sergio G. Lazzarini, 2015. "Strategizing by the government: Can industrial policy create firm-level competitive advantage?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 97-112, January.
    17. Eleanor Morgan, 2001. "A Decade of EC Merger Control," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 451-473.
    18. Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl & Katarina Zajc, 2016. "Inside post-socialist courts: the determinants of adjudicatory outcomes in Slovenian commercial disputes," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-115, February.
    19. Stephan, Paul III, 1996. "Toward a positive theory of privatization--lessons from soviet-type economies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 173-193, June.
    20. Tarun Kabiraj & Manas Chaudhuri, 1999. "On the welfare analysis of a cross-border merger," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 195-207.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:1346. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.