IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ecaffa/v23y2003i1p33-39.html

Is The Transition To The Market Too Important To Be Left To The Market?

Author

Listed:
  • Peter J. Boettke
  • Peter T. Leeson

Abstract

Most models of Central and Eastern European transition fail to appreciate the de facto organising principles that governed life in the Soviet‐type system. Concentration has instead been focused on the de jure pronouncements of what constituted these systems. It is this misidentification, we contend, that has caused the major problems for economists devising strategies for reform. Proper appreciation of the de facto realities underlying Soviet‐type economies sheds light on the crucial role that market forces must be allowed to play in the process of transition.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter J. Boettke & Peter T. Leeson, 2003. "Is The Transition To The Market Too Important To Be Left To The Market?," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 33-39, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ecaffa:v:23:y:2003:i:1:p:33-39
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-0270.00398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0270.00398
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-0270.00398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard E. Ericson, 1991. "The Classical Soviet-Type Economy: Nature of the System and Implications for Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 11-27, Fall.
    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. Peter J. Boettke & Rosolino A. Candela, 2020. "Productive specialization, peaceful cooperation and the problem of the predatory state: lessons from comparative historical political economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(3), pages 331-352, March.
    2. Peter J. Boettke, 2003. "Milton and Rose Friedman's \"Free to Choose\" and its impact in the global movement toward free market policy: 1979-2003," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Oct, pages 137-152.
    3. Judit KAPà S & Pál CZEGLÉDI, 2007. "What Does Transition Mean?: Post-socialist and Western European Countries Paralleled," The Journal of Comparative Economic Studies (JCES), The Japanese Society for Comparative Economic Studies (JSCES), vol. 3, pages 3-28, December.
    4. Peter Boettke, 2014. "Entrepreneurship, and the entrepreneurial market process: Israel M. Kirzner and the two levels of analysis in spontaneous order studies," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 233-247, September.
    5. Erwin Dekker & Pavel Kuchař, 2024. "Correction: Markets and knowledge commons: is there a difference between private and community governance of markets?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 201(3), pages 555-556, December.
    6. Ion Sterpan & Paul Dragos Aligica, 2015. "Transitions to Open Access Orders and Polycentricity: Exploring the Interface between Austrian Theory and Institutionalism," Advances in Austrian Economics, in: New Thinking in Austrian Political Economy, volume 19, pages 145-166, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    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. John E. Anderson, 2014. "Informal Payments to the Tax Collector in Transition Countries," Ekonomi-tek - International Economics Journal, Turkish Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-26, May.
    2. Nauro F. Campos & Abrizio Coricelli, 2002. "Growth in Transition: What We Know, What We Don't, and What We Should," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 793-836, September.
    3. Yingyi Qian & Gerard Roland & Chenggang Xu, 2001. "Attribute Coordination in Organizations," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 2(2), pages 487-518, November.
    4. Olivier Furrer & Carolyn P. Egri & David A. Ralston & Wade M. Danis & Emmanuelle Reynaud & Irina Naoumova & Mario Molteni & Arunas Starkus & Fidel León Darder & Marina Dabic & Amandine Furrer-Perrinja, 2010. "Attitudes toward Corporate Responsibilities in Western Europe and in Central and East Europe," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 379-398, June.
    5. Akerlof, George A. & Snower, Dennis J., 2016. "Bread and bullets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 58-71.
    6. Buchen, Clemens, 2010. "Emerging economic systems in Central and Eastern Europe – a qualitative and quantitative assessment," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 37141, February.
    7. Justin Yifu Lin & Pengfei Zhang, 2007. "Development Strategy, Optimal Industrial Structure and Economic Growth in Less Developed Countries," Development Economics Working Papers 22710, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    8. Klara Sabirianova Peter & Jan Svejnar & Katherine Terrell, 2012. "Foreign Investment, Corporate Ownership, and Development: Are Firms in Emerging Markets Catching Up to the World Standard?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 981-999, November.
    9. Jan Hagemejer & Peter Szewczyk & Joanna Tyrowicz, 2018. "Misallocations go a long way: evidence from firm-level data," GRAPE Working Papers 31, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    10. Lucia Tajoli, 2022. "Too much of a good thing? Russia-EU international trade relations at times of war," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 49(4), pages 807-834, December.
    11. Qian, Yingyi & Xu, Cheng-Gang, 1993. "Why China's economic reforms differ: the m-form hierarchy and entry/expansion of the non-state sector," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3755, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. repec:dgr:rugsom:04g26 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. John E. Anderson, 2005. "Fiscal Reform and its Firm-Level Effects in Eastern Europe and Central Asia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp800, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    14. Shen, Jim H. & Liu, Xiao Jie & Zhang, Jun, 2019. "Toward a unified theory of economic reform," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 318-333.
    15. Digdowiseiso, Kumba, 2010. "The transition of China and Ussr: A political economy perspective," MPRA Paper 22561, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. John Tomer, 2002. "Intangible Factors in the Eastern European Transition: A Socio-Economic Analysis," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 421-444.
    17. Sergey Alexeev, 2023. "Technical change and wage premiums amongst skilled labour: Evidence from the economic transition," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 189-216, January.
    18. Witteloostuijn, Adriaan van & Dikova, Desislava, 2005. "Acquisition versus greenfield foreign entry : diversification mode choice in Central and Eastern Europe," Research Report 04G26, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    19. Yingyi Qian & Gerard Roland & Chenggang Xu, 1999. "Coordinating Changes in M-form and U-form Organizations," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 284, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    20. McDonald, David A., 2016. "To corporatize or not to corporatize (and if so, how?)," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 107-114.
    21. Justin Yifu Lin, 2007. "Development and Transition : Idea, Strategy, and Viability," Development Economics Working Papers 22709, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.

    More about this item

    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:bla:ecaffa:v:23:y:2003:i:1:p:33-39. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0265-0665 .

    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.