Economic freedom and bureaucracy: Romania versus Bulgaria
In this article, we critically analyze some recent attempts to assess the degree of economic freedom that countries around the world enjoy. The devised indices measure the consistency of a nation’s policies and institutions with economic freedom. Although there seems to be a consensus among economists that in those countries where economic freedom is maintained economic growth follows, this hypothesis has yet to be empirically proven. The problem of bureaucratic decision-making, as a mechanism that may interfere with the economic freedom is also discussed. We then study the case of two quasi-similar, neighboring countries embarked on European integration, namely Romania and Bulgaria.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 3, Aksakov Str., 1040, Sofia|
Phone: (+359 2) 810 40 18
Fax: (+359 2) 988 21 08
Web page: http://www.iki.bas.bg
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Dawson, John W., 2003.
"Causality in the freedom-growth relationship,"
European Journal of Political Economy,
Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 479-495, September.
- John W. Dawson, 2001. "Causality in the Freedom-Growth Relationship," Working Papers 01-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
- Manuel Vega-Gordillo & JosÃ© L. Ã lvarez-Arce, 2003. "Economic Growth and Freedom: A Causality Study," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 23(2), pages 199-215, Fall. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bas:econst:y:2011:i:4:p:132-145. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Diana Dimitrova)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.