Development Patterns of Central and East European Countries (in the course of transition and following EU accession)
Abstract The patterns of Central and East European countries’ (CEECs) development in the course of transition and following EU accession have been determined by these countries’ generally uncritical adoption of policies consistent first with the commandments of the Washington Consensus and then with the requirements of EU membership (including the acquis communautaire). Despite more detailed (and largely less important or relevant) cross-country differences (institutional, structural etc.) studied in the panel-econometrics models of transition, the main macroeconomic tendencies characterising transition (and the later stages) can be naturally interpreted in terms of the impacts of demand-side factors. Wage developments turn out to be essential. The policies followed all along constitute the ‘integrative growth model’. External liberalisation, which is the most essential pillar of that model, exposed the CEECs to recurring problems over external imbalances, bubbles driven by capital inflows and resulting growth instabilities. The CEECs suffer from persistent (Keynesian) unemployment but are reluctant to conduct active fiscal policies. The hopes invested in the integrative model of CEEC growth seem to have been disap-pointed. After some acceleration (but from very low levels, which were additionally de-pressed following the policy-induced deep transitional recessions) CEEC growth collapsed in 2009 and slowed down to unimpressive levels thereafter. Under growing integration into the European Union, CEEC growth rates seem to converge to the low rates prevailing in the ‘old’ EU. But such a convergence in the growth rates does not promise a catch-up in income-level terms. Worse still, CEECs do not prove resilient to the crises shaking the ‘old’ EU (and the euro area in particular). Last, but not least, it cannot be overlooked that whatever progress made in the CEECs, it was achieved at a high cost. In most cases high unemployment has become endemic there while high and growing internal income (and social) polarisation – the opposite of cohesion – feeds political radicalism, likely to explode sooner or later. Unfortunately, transition came much too late. Had the transition happened in the 1960s, or even in the 1970s, the CEECs would have been in a much better economic position vis-à-vis the developed Western countries. More importantly, the ‘economic model’ then prevailing in the West would not, if taken over by the CEECs, prescribe a wholesale external and internal liberalisation – and, as such, would not force them into a race-to-the bottom in fiscal and wage policies. This ‘old West European model’ would, most probably, be more conducive than the integrative one to the CEECs’ faster, more balanced, and more sustainable economic growth. The ultimate goal of convergence with the rich Western partners would, most probably, be better served under a system with built-in limitations to free trade, free capital movements – and more scope for traditional industrial and trade policies. The CEECs are in a serious impasse now. But so are other EU Member States. Arguably, the economic policy-making in the EU (and in the Member States) needs to improve. There is no shortage of proposals in this respect. The official line (epitomised by the consecutive versions of Fiscal Packs, or Pacts) boils down to the insistence on stricter, and more disciplined, adherence to the original spirit of the Maastricht Treaty. The recipe is more of the same. However, there are good reasons to believe that following that official (‘austerity’) line will do nothing to ease the vitally important problems plaguing the entire EU – and thus also the CEECs. A more radical overhaul of the basic paradigms of EU economic policy-making may be needed. Whether, and under what circumstances, such an overhaul can happen is yet another question.
|Length:||47 pages including 19 Tables|
|Date of creation:||Jul 2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published as wiiw Research Report|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (+43-1) 533 66 10
Fax: (+43-1) 533 66 10-50
Web page: http://www.wiiw.ac.atEmail:
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://wiiw.ac.at|
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.:
- 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.
- Nauro F. Campos & Fabrizio Coricelli, 2002. "Growth in Transition: What We Know, What We Don't, and What We Should," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 470, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Campos, Nauro F & Coricelli, Fabrizio, 2002. "Growth in Transition: What we Know, What we Don't and What we Should," CEPR Discussion Papers 3246, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Eicher, Theo S. & Schreiber, Till, 2010.
"Structural policies and growth: Time series evidence from a natural experiment,"
Journal of Development Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 169-179, January.
- Theo Eicher & Till Schreiber, 2006. "Structural Policies and Growth: Time Series Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Working Papers 48, Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
- Gérard Roland & Thierry Verdier, 1999.
"Transition and the output fall,"
The Economics of Transition,
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, March.
- Roland, Gérard & Verdier, Thierry, 1997. "Transition and the Output Fall," CEPR Discussion Papers 1636, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Gerard Roland & Thierry Verdier, 1997. "Transition and the Output Fall," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 37, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Roland, G. & Verdier, T., 1997. "Transition and the Output Fall," DELTA Working Papers 97-09, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
- Leon Podkaminer, 2010. "Real Convergence And Price Levels: Long-Term Tendencies Versus Short-Term Performance In The Enlarged European Union," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 640-664, November.
- Leon Podkaminer, 1995. "Household Behavior under "Austerity" Stabilization of Hyperinflation: The Roots of Fragility," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 17(4), pages 593-605, July.
- Elisabetta Falcetti & Martin Raiser & Peter Sanfey, 2000.
"Defying the odds: initial conditions, reforms and growth in the first decade of transition,"
55, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Office of the Chief Economist.
- 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.
- Barro, Robert J, 1991.
"Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 106(2), pages 407-43, May.
- Barro, R.J., 1989. "Economic Growth In A Cross Section Of Countries," RCER Working Papers 201, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Robert J. Barro, 1989. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," NBER Working Papers 3120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bhagwati, Jagdish N, 1982. "Directly Unproductive, Profit-seeking (DUP) Activities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 988-1002, October.
- Angela Cheptea, 2007. "Trade liberalization and institutional reforms," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 15(2), pages 211-255, 04.
- Ratna Sahay & Jeromin Zettelmeyer & Eduardo Borensztein & Andrew Berg, 1999. "The Evolution of Output in Transition Economies; Explaining the Differences," IMF Working Papers 99/73, International Monetary Fund.
- Roxana Radulescu & David Barlow, 2002. "The relationship between policies and growth in transition countries," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 10(3), pages 719-745, November.
- Kazimierz Laski & Leon Podkaminer, 2012. "The basic paradigms of EU economic policy-making need to be changed," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 253-270.
- Falcetti, Elisabetta & Lysenko, Tatiana & Sanfey, Peter, 2006.
"Reforms and growth in transition: Re-examining the evidence,"
Journal of Comparative Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 421-445, September.
- Elisabetta Falcetti & Tatiana Lysenko & Peter Sanfey, 2005. "Reforms and growth in transition: re-examining the evidence," Working Papers 90, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Office of the Chief Economist.
- Joachim Ragnitz, 2007. "Explaining the East German Productivity Gap � The Role of Human Capital," Kiel Working Papers 1310, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Leon Podkaminer, 1998. "Inflationary Effects of High Nominal Interest Rates," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 20(4), pages 583-596, July.
- Kazimierz Laski & Roman Römisch, 2003. "From Accession to Cohesion: Ireland, Greece, Portugal and Spain and Lessons for the Next Accession," wiiw Research Reports 298, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
- Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999.
"Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 114(1), pages 83-116, February.
- Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output per Worker than Others?," NBER Working Papers 6564, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James Robinson, 2004.
"Institutions as the Fundamental Cause of Long-Run Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
10481, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James Robinson, 2004. "Institutions As The Fundamental Cause Of Long-Run Growth," DOCUMENTOS CEDE 002889, UNIVERSIDAD DE LOS ANDES-CEDE.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Johnson, Simon & Robinson, James A, 2004. "Institutions as the Fundamental Cause of Long-Run Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 4458, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- International Monetary Fund, 1998. "Recovery and Growth in Transition Economies 1990-1997; A Stylized Regression Analysis," IMF Working Papers 98/141, International Monetary Fund.
- John Bennett & Saul Estrin & Giovanni Urga, 2007. "Methods of privatization and economic growth in transition economies," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 15, pages 661-683, October.
- Kolodko, Grzegorz W., 2000. "From Shock to Therapy: The Political Economy of Postsocialist Transformation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198297437, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wii:rpaper:rr:388. 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: (Customer service)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.