Political Determinants of Economic Reforms in Former Communist Countries
The results of the first decade of economic transition are very uneven and are distributed according to a sub-regional pattern. The group of "leading reformers" consists of middle-income countries of democratic capitalism of the Central Europe and Baltic region (CEB). The second group of less advanced reformers includes mainly lower- and lower-middle-income countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) where both capitalism and democracy are still immature and sometimes heavily distorted. This differentiation can be explained mainly by the adopted transition strategies and political factors determining them. Also the perspective of the European integration has played an important leveraging role. Fast reforms allowed for shortening the period of a temporary system vacuum, breaking down the inertia of the old system, and exploiting maximally the initial political window of opportunity. The ability of individual countries to follow the effective (i.e. fast) reform strategy was determined by the scale of the initial political changes and further developments in the sphere of institutional and political reform. Generally, a very strong correlation between the progress in political and economic reforms could be observed. Looking at the role of specific institutional solutions one must underline the advantage of the parliamentary or parliamentary-presidential regime over the presidential or presidential-parliamentary system. The former helped to build the transparent and relatively stable system of the political parties while the latter contributed to political fragmentation, irresponsible legislature and oligarchic capitalism.
|Date of creation:||2002|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Aleja Jana Pawla II, 61, 01-031 Warsaw|
Phone: +48 22 206 29 00
Fax: +48 22 206 29 01
Web page: http://www.case-research.eu/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Aslund Anders, 1994. "Lessons of the First Four Years of Systemic Change in Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 22-38, August.
- Marek Dabrowski & Stanislaw Gomulka & Jacek Rostowski, 2001.
"Whence reform? A critique of the stiglitz perspective,"
Journal of Economic Policy Reform,
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 291-324.
- Marek Dabrowski & Stanislaw Gomulka & Jacek Rostowski, 2000. "Whence reform? A critique of the Stiglitz perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 20167, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- M Dabrowski & Stanislaw Gomulka & J Rostowski, 2000. "Whence Reform? A Critique of the Stiglitz Perspective," CEP Discussion Papers dp0471, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Dethier, Jean-Jacques*Ghanem, Hafez*Zoli, Edda, 1999. "Does democracy facilitate the economic transition : an empirical study of Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2194, The World Bank.
- Anders Åslund & Peter Boone & Simon Johnson, 1996. "How to Stabilize: Lessons from Post -communist Countries," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 27(1), pages 217-314.
- World Bank, 2002. "Transition, The First Ten Years : Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 14042, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sec:cnstan:0242. 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: (Agata Kwiek)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.