IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpgt/0506003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What might the Soviet Union learn from the OECD countries in economics and politics ? An article from 1991 with some comments from 2005

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Cool

    (1991)

  • Jan Tinbergen

    (1991)

  • Thomas Colignatus

    (Thomas Cool Consultancy & Econometrics, 2005)

Abstract

When cleaning up my archives I came across a short article of April 1991 co-authored with Jan Tinbergen, on what the Soviet Union might learn from OECD countries in economics and politics. The article apparently never got published, partly since the Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991. Jan Tinbergen died in 1994. Reading the article again in 2005 shows that some arguments still have value. In 2005, an advice, purely my own now, would be that Russia and the other republics of the former Soviet Union apply for membership of the European Union.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Cool & Jan Tinbergen & Thomas Colignatus, 2005. "What might the Soviet Union learn from the OECD countries in economics and politics ? An article from 1991 with some comments from 2005," General Economics and Teaching 0506003, EconWPA.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0506003 Note: 13 pages pdf
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/get/papers/0506/0506003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sauer, Raymond D, 1988. "Estimates of the Returns to Quality and Coauthorship in Economic Academia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 855-866, August.
    2. Ofer H. Azar, 2004. "Rejections and the importance of first response times," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 31(3), pages 259-274, March.
    3. David N. Laband, 1990. "Is There Value-Added from the Review Process in Economics?: Preliminary Evidence from Authors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 341-352.
    4. Thomson, William, 2011. "A Guide for the Young Economist," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 026251589x, January.
    5. Trivedi, Pravin K, 1993. "An Analysis of Publication Lags in Econometrics," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 93-100, Jan.-Marc.
    6. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Facts and Myths about Refereeing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 153-163, Winter.
    7. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    8. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
    9. Engers, Maxim & Gans, Joshua S, 1998. "Why Referees Are Not Paid (Enough)," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1341-1349, December.
    10. Renée M. Stulz, 2000. "Report of the Editor for His Tenure and 1999," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1861-1892, August.
    11. Daniel S. Hamermesh & Sharon M. Oster, 2002. "Tools or Toys? The Impact of High Technology on Scholarly Productivity," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(4), pages 539-555, October.
    12. Laband, David N & Piette, Michael J, 1994. "Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 194-203, February.
    13. Ofer H. Azar, 2006. "The Academic Review Process: How Can We Make it More Efficient?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 50(1), pages 37-50, March.
    14. Oster, Sharon, 1980. "The Optimal Order for Submitting Manuscripts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 444-448, June.
    15. Blank, Rebecca M, 1991. "The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1041-1067, December.
    16. Moore, William J & Newman, Robert J & Turnbull, Geoffrey K, 2001. "Reputational Capital and Academic Pay," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 663-671, October.
    17. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A00 - General Economics and Teaching - - General - - - General

    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:wpa:wuwpgt:0506003. 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: (EconWPA). General contact details of provider: http://econwpa.repec.org .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.