IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/97585.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Support for Market Economy Principles in European Post-Communist Countries during 1999–2008

Author

Listed:
  • Sirovátka, Tomáš
  • Guzi, Martin
  • Saxonberg, Steve

Abstract

Since the fall of the communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe in 1989, a neoliberal discourse has dominated the thinking of the political elite in the post-communist countries, paving the way for unprecedented mass privatisation, economic deregulation, and other market reforms. In this article, we study the development of public support for market economy principles in post-communist countries compared to other European countries during the 1999-2008 period, which is the period that directly followed the initial stage of market transformation. We use data from the European Value Survey covering 22 European countries for the years 1999/2000 and 2008/2009. In addition to analysing the trends, we apply multilevel regression models to study the determinants and levels of support for the market economy in post-communist and other European countries. We find that, when controlling for individual and country-level variables, a significant increase in support for market economy principles has taken place in the post-communist cluster, which is not the case in the other countries. There is some inconsistency in support for the individual principles of market economics: support exists in post-communist countries for the notion that the state should be responsible for the social and economic well-being of its inhabitants and for state regulation of the economy, while support is high for some market economy principles, such as free competition and private ownership. In other words, support for some kind of social market seems to prevail among those living in post-communist countries, based on the notion that the state should combine a market economy with relatively generous social policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Sirovátka, Tomáš & Guzi, Martin & Saxonberg, Steve, 2019. "Support for Market Economy Principles in European Post-Communist Countries during 1999–2008," MPRA Paper 97585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:97585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/97585/1/MPRA_paper_97585.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Denisova, Irina & Eller, Markus & Frye, Timothy & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2012. "Everyone hates privatization, but why? Survey evidence from 28 post-communist countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 44-61.
    2. Fidrmuc, Jan, 2000. "Political support for reforms: Economics of voting in transition countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1491-1513, August.
    3. Ugo Panizza & Mónica Yañez, 2005. "Why are Latin Americans so unhappy about reforms?," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 8, pages 1-29, May.
    4. Torgler, Benno, 2005. "Tax morale and direct democracy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 525-531, June.
    5. Gerald M. Easter, 2002. "Politics of Revenue Extraction in Post-Communist States: Poland and Russia Compared," Politics & Society, , vol. 30(4), pages 599-627, December.
    6. Miller, Arthur H. & Hesli, Vicki L. & Reisinger, William M., 1994. "Reassessing Mass Support for Political and Economic Change in the Former USSR," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(2), pages 399-411, June.
    7. Golinelli, Roberto & Rovelli, Riccardo, 2013. "Did growth and reforms increase citizens' support for the transition?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 112-137.
    8. Gérard Roland, 2002. "The Political Economy of Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 29-50, Winter.
    9. Ban, Cornel, 2016. "Ruling Ideas: How Global Neoliberalism Goes Local," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780190600396, Decembrie.
    10. Raj M. Desai & Anders Olofsgård, 2006. "Political Constraints and Public Support for Market Reform," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 53(si), pages 1-5.
    11. Riccardo Rovelli & Anzelika Zaiceva, 2013. "Did support for economic and political reforms increase during the post-communist transition, and if so, why?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 21(2), pages 193-240, April.
    12. Denisova, Irina & Eller, Markus & Frye, Timothy & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2009. "Who Wants To Revise Privatization? The Complementarity of Market Skills and Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 284-304, May.
    13. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00754602 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Jan Fidrmuc, 1999. "Unemployment and the dynamics of political support for economic reforms," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 139-156.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Irina Denisova, 2016. "Institutions and the support for market reforms," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 258-258, May.
    2. Lucie Coufalová & Lenka Kolajtová & Libor Žídek, 2023. "Public support for economic transition," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 161-187, January.
    3. Golinelli, Roberto & Rovelli, Riccardo, 2013. "Did growth and reforms increase citizens' support for the transition?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 112-137.
    4. Riccardo Rovelli & Anzelika Zaiceva, 2013. "Did support for economic and political reforms increase during the post-communist transition, and if so, why?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 21(2), pages 193-240, April.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7fst0pcf5j8cr99e1nuobt97rn is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Sergei Guriev & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2009. "(Un)happiness in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(2), pages 143-168, Spring.
    7. repec:zbw:bofitp:2020_017 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. William Pyle, 2021. "Russia’s “impressionable years”: life experience during the exit from communism and Putin-era beliefs," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
    9. Matteo Migheli, 2016. "Behind the Wall: What Remains of the “Communist Legacy” in Contemporary Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 671-690, June.
    10. Hayo, Bernd, 2004. "Public support for creating a market economy in Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 720-744, December.
    11. Denisova, Irina & Eller, Markus & Frye, Timothy & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2012. "Everyone hates privatization, but why? Survey evidence from 28 post-communist countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 44-61.
    12. Valev, Neven, 2004. "No pain, no gain: market reform, unemployment, and politics in Bulgaria," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 409-425, September.
    13. Iyer, Lakshmi & Meng, Xin & Qian, Nancy & Zhao, Xiaoxue, 2019. "Economic transition and private-sector labor: Evidence from urban China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 579-600.
    14. Bonatti, Luigi & Fracasso, Andrea, 2019. "Policy inertia, self-defeating expectations and structural reforms: can policy modeling cope?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 943-962.
    15. Vladan Ivanović & Vadim Kufenko & Boris Begović & Nenad Stanišić & Vincent Geloso, 2019. "Continuity Under a Different Name: The Outcome of Privatisation in Serbia," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 159-180, March.
    16. Grosjean, Pauline & Senik, Claudia, 2007. "Should Market Liberalization Precede Democracy? Causal Relations between Political Preferences and Development," IZA Discussion Papers 2889, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Neher, Frank, 2011. "Markets wanted: Expectation overshooting in transition," Discussion Papers 2011/1, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    18. Jin, Olivia & Pyle, William, 2023. "Labor market hardships and preferences for public sector employment and employers: Evidence from Russia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 577-591.
    19. Fidrmuc, Jan & Doyle, Orla, 2003. "Anatomy of Voting Behaviour and Attitudes During Post-Communist Transition Czech Republic 1990-98," CEPR Discussion Papers 3801, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. William Pyle, 2021. "Russia’s “impressionable years”: life experience during the exit from communism and Putin-era beliefs," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
    21. Migheli, Matteo, 2009. "The two sides of a ghost: Twenty years without the wall," POLIS Working Papers 125, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    22. Migheli, Matteo, 2010. "Supporting the free and competitive market in China and India: Differences and evolution over time," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 73-90, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    market economy; post-communist countries; free competition; private ownership; state regulation of economy; welfare attitudes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • B20 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - General
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:97585. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.