Skip to main content

A Lesson for the Contemporary European Periphery from the Transition Process of the CEE Countries

  • Chapter
Competitiveness, Social Inclusion and Sustainability in a Diverse European Union
  • 985 Accesses

Abstract

How can we rebuild the competitiveness of the so-called periphery countries? This chapter discusses the following two research questions: What are the important factors that distinguish between successful and less successful CEE countries during their transition period? What is a possible lesson from the transition process in the CEE countries for the contemporary European periphery? The first part of this chapter contains initial remarks, terminology and a classification of the CEE countries according to their successfulness in the transition process. The second part provides a list of crucial factors: the level of (non-elite) political stability, the quality of the institutional framework, the maturity and compatibility of informal institutions and the initial level of economic development. The third part states some factors of minor importance for countries’ success in the transition process. The conclusion offers a summary of the previous outcomes and moreover, a discussion of the research questions. Similar to the CEECs before their entrance into the EU, the periphery countries need to find a direction to pursue during the next 10–15 years. Budgetary savings are inevitable; nevertheless, positive long-term visions should also be formulated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Based on the results of the transition, Åslund (2008) distinguishes among three groups of CEE countries: radical reformers (Central Europe, the Baltics) versus gradual reformers (South-Eastern Europe, most of the post-Soviet states) versus countries that have maintained the old dictatorships (Belarus, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan).

    Similarly, Lane and Myant (2007) distinguish among three groups of post-Communist countries: fairly successful transition countries (Estonia, Slovenia, East Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, Ukraine) versus hybrid economies (Russia, Kazakhstan, Georgia, the Western Balkans) versus statist societies (Belarus, China).

  2. 2.

    Furthermore, within the entire group of new EU Member States, only the Romanian case involves a semi-presidential system.

  3. 3.

    According to Tošovský (2000), only 2 % of Czechoslovak national income in the 1980s was produced in the private sector.

References

  • Aisen A, Veiga FJ (2013) How does political instability affect economic growth? Eur J Polit Econ 29(C):151–167, Elsevier

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Perotti R (1994) The political economy of growth: a critical survey of the recent literature. World Bank Econ Rev 8(3):351–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Ozler S, Roubini N, Swagel P (1996) Political instability and economic growth. J Econ Growth 1(2):189–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Åslund A (2008) Transition economies. The concise encyclopedia of economics, library of economics and liberty. Available from: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TransitionEconomies.html [online]. Accessed 08 May 2013

  • Clague C (1997) Institutions and economic development: growth and governance in less-developed and post-socialist countries. John Hopkins University Press, London. ISBN 978-0801854934

    Google Scholar 

  • Doing Business—Measuring Business Regulations (2014) The World Bank. Available from: http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings. Accessed 19 July 2014

  • European Comission (2012) Convergence report 2012. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2012/pdf/ee-2012-3_en.pdf [online]. Accessed 11 May 2015

  • Foa R (2008) Social institutions and human development. Social development working papers, paper no. 006, Jul 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Gnan E, Kwapil C, Valderrama MT (2005) EU and EMU entry: a monetary policy regime change for Austria? Monetary Policy Econ Q2(05):53–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Greif A (1993) Contract enforceability and economic institutions in early trade: the Maghribi Traders’ coalition. Am Econ Rev 83(3):525–548

    Google Scholar 

  • Grochová L, Kouba L (2011) Political instability and economic growth: an empirical evidence from the Baltic states. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis LIX(2):81–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyimah-Brempong K, Dapaah AS (1996) Non elite political instability and economic growth: evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. J Econ Dev 21(1):181–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen CW (2013) Economic growth and individualism: the role of informal institutions. Econ Lett 118(2):378–380, Elsevier

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoen HW (1996) “Shock versus gradualism” in Central Europe reconsidered. Comp Econ Stud 38(1):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IMF (2014) World economic outlook database, April 2014. Database updated on 8 April 2014. Accessed on 10 Apr 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Jong-A-Pin R (2009) On the measurement of political instability and its impact on economic growth. Eur J Polit Econ 25:15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles S, Weatherston C (2006) Informal institutions and cross-country income differences. CREDIT research paper. no. 06/06

    Google Scholar 

  • Kouba L (2010) Failure of experimental transition of former German democratic republic from the perspective of contemporary social-economic approaches to the growth theory (In Czech). Ekonomicky Casopis 58(7):707–724

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane DS, Myant M (2007) Varieties of capitalism in post-communist countries. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p xiv, 278 p. ISBN 978-140-3996-411

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindert PH (2003) Voice and growth: was churchill right? J Econ Hist v63(2, Jun):315–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantzavinos C (2001) Individuals, institutions and markets. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ISBN 978-0521773584

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ISBN 9780521397346

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Novotna T (2011) Dilemmas of transitions: three institution-building lessons from Central and Eastern Europe. SWP working paper, FG 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson M (2000) Power and prosperity. Outgrowing communist and capitalist dictatorships. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Orenstein MA (2001) Out of the red: building capitalism and democracy in postcommunist Europe. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, p xiv, 166. ISBN 04-720-6746-X

    Google Scholar 

  • Popov V (2007) Shock therapy versus gradualism reconsidered: lessons from transition economies after 15 years of reforms1. Comp Econ Stud 49(1):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roland G (1994) The role of political constraints in transition strategies. Econ Transit 2(1):27–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soysa I, Jütting J (2007) How informal institutions matter and what makes them chang. In: Jütting J (ed) Informal institutions: how social norms help or hinder development. OECD, Paris, p 174. ISBN 92-640-3906-6

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabellini Q (2010) Culture and institutions: economic development in the regions of Europe. J Eur Econ Assoc 8(4):677–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Worldwide Governance Indicators (2013) The World Bank Group. Available from: www.govindicators.com. Accessed 19 Jul 2014

  • Tošovský J (2000) After ten years, some lessons from transition (In Czech). Bankovnictví, no 11

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasicek B (2009) Monetary policy rules and inflation process in open emerging economies: evidence for 12 new EU members. William Davidson Institute: working paper. No. 968

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson C (2009) Informal institutions rule: institutiona arrangements and economic performance. Public Choice 139(3):371–387, Springer

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zakaria F (2005) The future of freedom: illiberal democracy at home and Abroad (In Czech). Academia, Praha. ISBN 80-200-1285-0

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler CH (2012) Monetary policy under alternative exchange rate regimes in central and Eastern Europe. Diskussionsbeiträge/Universität Leipzig, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät. No. 104. ISSN 1437-9384

    Google Scholar 

  • Zweynert J, Goldschmidt N (2005) The two transitions in Central and Eastern Europe and the relation between path dependent and politically implemented institutional change. Freiburg discussion papers on constitutional economics, no. 05/3

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luděk Kouba .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kouba, L. (2016). A Lesson for the Contemporary European Periphery from the Transition Process of the CEE Countries. In: Huber, P., Nerudová, D., Rozmahel, P. (eds) Competitiveness, Social Inclusion and Sustainability in a Diverse European Union. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17299-6_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics