IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/imf/imfwpa/05-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who is Still Haunted by the Specter of Communism? Explaining Relative Output Contractions Under Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Katrin Elborgh-Woytek
  • Julian Berengaut

Abstract

The paper analyzes the initial output decline in transition economies by estimating a crosssection model stressing two major factors-conflicts and the legacies of the Soviet period. We link the Soviet legacies in place at the outset of the transition to the subsequent path for the development of market-related institutions. Institutional development (as proxied by measures of corruption) is used as an intermediate variable. An instrumental variable approach is followed to derive estimates that are not biased by the possible endogeneity of corruption with respect to output developments. Assuming that the extent of Soviet legacies was positively correlated with the length of the communist rule allows us to use the years under the Soviet regime as an instrument.

Suggested Citation

  • Katrin Elborgh-Woytek & Julian Berengaut, 2005. "Who is Still Haunted by the Specter of Communism? Explaining Relative Output Contractions Under Transition," IMF Working Papers 05/68, International Monetary Fund.
  • Handle: RePEc:imf:imfwpa:05/68
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=18078
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stanley Fischer & Ratna Sahay, 2000. "The Transition Economies After Ten Years," IMF Working Papers 00/30, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Oleh Havrylyshyn & Ron van Rooden, 2003. "Institutions Matter in Transition, But So Do Policies," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 45(1), pages 2-24, March.
    3. Falcetti, Elisabetta & Raiser, Martin & Sanfey, Peter, 2002. "Defying the Odds: Initial Conditions, Reforms, and Growth in the First Decade of Transition," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 229-250, June.
    4. Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward & La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The new comparative economics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 595-619, December.
    5. Stanley Fischer & Ratna Sahay, 2000. "The Transition Economies After Ten Years," NBER Working Papers 7664, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Ratna Sahay & Jeronimo Zettelmeyer & Eduardo Borensztein & Andrew Berg, 1999. "The Evolution of Output in Transition Economies; Explaining the Differences," IMF Working Papers 99/73, International Monetary Fund.
    7. S. Fisher & R. Sahay & C. A. Vegh, 1997. "Stabilization and Growth in Transition Economies: The Early Experience," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 5.
    8. International Monetary Fund, 2000. "The Great Contractions in Russia, the Baltics and the Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union; A View From the Supply Side," IMF Working Papers 00/32, International Monetary Fund.
    9. Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2001. "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1369-1401, December.
    10. Aleksei Makushkin, 1993. "From Conversion to Deindustrialization?," Problems of Economic Transition, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(9), pages 34-45.
    11. Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1996. "The Roles of the State and the Market in Establishing Property Rights," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 87-103, Spring.
    12. International Monetary Fund, 2000. "Growth Experience in Transition Countries, 90-98," IMF Occasional Papers 184, International Monetary Fund.
    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. Edward R. Gemayel & David A. Grigorian, 2006. "How Tight is Too Tight? A Look at Welfare Implications of Distortionary Policies in Uzbekistan," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 3(2), pages 239-261, December.
    2. Andrew J Tiffin, 2006. "Ukraine; The Cost of Weak Institutions," IMF Working Papers 06/167, International Monetary Fund.

    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:imf:imfwpa:05/68. 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: (Jim Beardow) or (Hassan Zaidi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/imfffus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.