IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Technical Progress as a Solution for Romania and Greece to Face the Global Crisis’ Problems and the Bad Forecasts

  • Romeo Ionescu
Registered author(s):

    The paper deals with the two Member States which were put down by the crisis: Greece and Romania. As a result, the analysis is focused on 2009-2012 time period, in order to explain the economic situation, to forecast it and to find another solution to face the crisis challenge. The first step was to analyse the possibility to define an economic model which to be able to quantify the support of the technical progress on the economic recovery. A distinct part of the paper is that regarding to the model’s equations and parameters which are used from qualified statistical surveys. The model consists of a specific production function which was defined in order to quantify the labour productivity and the fixed capital efficiency under the impact of the technical progress. This technical progress in the economy is quantified by the growth of the labour knowledge and the growth of fixed capital use degree. The economic analysis is focused on labour productivity and capital efficiency and tried to offer solutions in order to optimise the economic behaviour under crisis using the human capital stock of knowledge. The last part of the paper analyses the evolution of the fixed capital efficiency as a result of the labour knowledge growth and the evolution of the fixed capital efficiency supported by the new machines and equipments. The main conclusion of the paper is that the technical progress represents a chance for the economic recovery in Romania and Greece. Both countries have relative advantage in using their relative high skilled labour and paying lower wages caused by the crisis. But their ability to obtain benefits from these is still far away. The model used in the paper is able to offer a useful instrument of analysis in order to quantify the impact of the technical progress on the economic development. The whole analysis is based on official databases: Eurostat, IMF, World Bank and National Statistic Institutes.

    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.

    File URL: http://www.ersj.eu/repec/ers/papers/12_2_p3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by European Research Studies Journal in its journal European Research Studies Journal.

    Volume (Year): XV (2012)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 33-46

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xv:y:2012:i:2:p:33-46
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.ersj.eu/

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Avi J. Cohen, 2003. "Retrospectives: Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 199-214, Winter.
    2. Mishra, SK, 2007. "A Brief History of Production Functions," MPRA Paper 5254, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 269-270, September.
    4. Solow, Robert M., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow-Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 267-268, September.
    5. Daly, Herman E., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 261-266, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xv:y:2012:i:2:p:33-46. 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: (Eleni Giannakopoulou)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.