Abstract
In this chapter, we discuss possible interactions across structural policy domains. While relatively more studied in the context of the post-communist transition literature, our survey suggests that relationships of this type hold more generally and can be important to improve our understanding of the relationship between structural reforms and long-run economic growth. Given its potential relevance for the design of successful reform packages, exploring in a more exhaustive way the notion that the effect of a given reform on economic growth depends on the progress made in other policy areas should be a priority point for future research. This may be particularly relevant to help unlock the growth potential of many developing and emerging countries, namely concerning their integration in the global economy.
Keywords
- Policy complementarities
- Structural reforms
- Economic growth
- Post-communist transition
- Economic development
The authors would like to thank Elodie Douarin and Oleh Havrylyshyn for very useful comments on the first draft of this paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the OECD and its Member countries. Rocha acknowledges financial support from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (Portugal) through research grant UIDB/05069/2020.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
A simple demonstration of this result is provided in Macedo and Oliveira Martins (2008).
- 2.
- 3.
See also OECD (2002) on Romania.
- 4.
Namely foreign owners; the literature finds that privatisation to foreign owners has better effects on firm performance than privatisation to domestic owners. See Iwasaki and Mizobata (2018), Estrin et al. (2009), and also section 5.2 in Bloom et al. (2012) regarding differences in management practices.
- 5.
Defensive or reactive restructuring is based on shedding labour, cutting obsolete production lines, getting rid of non-productive assets, and so on, while strategic restructuring involves new investments and often requires financial intermediation.
- 6.
Table 3 in Rocha (2015) provides some empirical evidence of such a complementarity link, in that the coefficient of the interaction term between price liberalisation and competition policy is positive and statistically significant.
- 7.
The nine covered policy areas are price liberalisation, large-scale privatisation, small-scale privatisation, governance and enterprise restructuring, trade and foreign exchange system, competition policy, banking reform and interest rate liberalisation, securities markets and non-bank financial institutions, and infrastructure. The authors also present a 9 × 9 matrix with 36 potential bilateral policy interactions. For instance, large-scale privatisation can generate more returns if securities exchanges are developed, as this eases financing mechanisms (see column 1 line 8 in their Table 1); also, competition policy will benefit from banking sector reform, as this enhances entry mechanisms (column 6 line 7).
- 8.
The level of complementarity displays a negative sign in the Macedo and Oliveira Martins (2008) growth regressions. As noted by the authors, in the context of transition high complementarity by itself does not necessarily lead to higher output growth. Indeed, transition is about shifting from a socialist system that, in some sense, had its own coherence but was totally rigid and distorted, towards a flexible market system (that also has a high complementarity). To make this structural change, not all reforms can be implemented at the same time. Reformers had to accept a less coherent system during the initial phase of the transition and the second-best costs associated with it. As the transition progresses and the average level of reforms continues to increase, at some point the complementarity index begins to increase.
- 9.
The transition literature has emphasised the difference between first-stage (“liberalisation”) and second-stage (i.e. more “institutional”) reforms, sometimes noting that implementing the former stimulated the development of the latter. See, for example, Douarin and Mickiewicz (2017), Di Tommaso et al. (2007), and Havrylyshyn and van Rooden (2003).
- 10.
In Chang et al. (2009) trade openness is measured as the ratio of trade to GDP adjusted for structural country characteristics; more specifically, this is the residual of a regression of the log of the ratio of exports and imports to GDP on the logs of area and population, and dummies for oil exporting and for landlocked countries. The authors use this variable as an attempt to strengthen the outcome-policy connection, as the volume of trade is an outcome measure related to trade policy, but not exclusively so.
- 11.
Indeed, for n = 3, we have that \( \frac{\partial}{\partial {P}_1\partial {P}_2}\left({\left(\frac{1}{3}\sum {P_i}^{\eta}\right)}^{\frac{1}{\eta}}\right)=\left(1-\eta \right){\left(\frac{1}{3}\right)}^{1/\eta}{\left({P}_1{P}_2\right)}^{\eta -1}{\left({P_1}^{\eta}+{P_2}^{\eta}+{P_3}^{\eta}\right)}^{\frac{1-2\eta}{\eta}} \); all terms after (1 − η) are positive.
- 12.
Notice however that a reverse causality argument is not totally clear-cut. High growth, actual or expected, can either generate pressure for reforms in some areas or generate circumstances where reforms are perceived as being not very necessary.
References
Abadie, A., Diamond, A., & Hainmueller, J. (2010). Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490), 493–505.
Ahmed, A. D. (2013). Effects of Financial Liberalization on Financial Market Development and Economic Performance of the SSA Region: An Empirical Assessment. Economic Modelling, 30, 261–273.
Alfaro, L., Chanda, A., Kalemli-Ozcan, S., & Sayek, S. (2004). FDI and Economic Growth: The Role of Local Financial Markets. Journal of International Economics, 64(1), 89–112.
Alfaro, L., Chanda, A., Kalemli-Ozcan, S., & Sayek, S. (2010). Does Foreign Direct Investment Promote Growth? Exploring the Role of Financial Markets on Linkages. Journal of Development Economics, 91(2), 242–256.
Amable, B., Demmou, L., & Gatti, D. (2011). The Effect of Employment Protection and Product Market Regulation on Labour Market Performance: Substitution or Complementarity? Applied Economics, 43(4), 449–464.
Åslund, A., & Djankov, S. (Eds.). (2014). The Great Rebirth: Lessons from the Victory of Capitalism over Communism. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Aziz, J., & Westcott, R. F. (1997). Policy Complementarities and the Washington Consensus. International Monetary Fund Working Paper 97-118.
Babecký, J., & Havránek, T. (2014). Structural Reforms and Growth in Transition: A Meta-analysis. Economics of Transition, 22(1), 13–42.
Balasubramanyam, V. N., Salisu, M., & Sapsford, D. (1996). Foreign Direct Investment and Growth in EP and IS Countries. Economic Journal, 106(434), 92–105.
Banalieva, E. R. (2014). Embracing the Second Best? Synchronization of Reform Speeds, Excess High Discretion Slack, and Performance of Transition Economy Firms. Global Strategy Journal, 4(2), 104–126.
Bassanini, A., & Duval, R. (2009). Unemployment, Institutions, and Reform Complementarities: Re-assessing the Aggregate Evidence for OECD Countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25(1), 40–59.
Berger, H., & Danninger, S. (2007). The Employment Effects of Labor and Product Market Deregulation and Their Implications for Structural Reform. IMF Staff Papers, 54(3), 591–619.
Bloom, N., Schweiger, H., & Van Reenen, J. (2012). The Land That Lean Manufacturing Forgot? Management Practices in Transition Countries. Economics of Transition, 20(4), 593–635.
Bumann, S., Hermes, N., & Lensink, R. (2013). Financial liberalization and Economic Growth: A Meta-analysis. Journal of International Money and Finance, 33, 255–281.
Cacciatore, M., Duval, R., Fiori, G., & Ghironi, F. (2016). Short-term Pain for Long-Term Gain: Market Deregulation and Monetary Policy in Small Open Economies. Journal of International Money and Finance, 68, 358–385.
Calderón, C., & Fuentes, R. (2006). Complementarities between Institutions and Openness in Economic Development: Evidence for a Panel of Countries. Cuadernos de Economía, 43(127), 49–80.
Campos, N. F., & Coricelli, A. (2002). Growth in Transition: What We Know, What We Don’t, and What We Should. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(3), 793–836.
Chang, R., Kaltani, L., & Loayza, N. V. (2009). Openness can be Good for Growth: The Role of Policy Complementarities. Journal of Development Economics, 90(1), 33–49.
Claessens, S., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Huizinga, H. (2001). How Does Foreign Entry Affect Domestic Banking Markets? Journal of Banking and Finance, 25(5), 891–911.
Coe, D. T., & Snower, D. J. (1997). Policy Complementarities: The Case for Fundamental Labor Market Reform. IMF Staff Papers, 44(1), 1–35.
Coricelli, F., & Maurel, M. (2011). Growth and Crisis in Transition: A Comparative Perspective. Review of International Economics, 19(1), 49–64.
Dennis, A. (2006). Trade Liberalization, Factor Market Flexibility, and Growth: The Case of Morocco and Tunisia. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3857.
Di Tommaso, M. L., Raiser, M., & Weeks, M. (2007). Home Grown or Imported? Initial Conditions, External Anchors and the Determinants of Institutional Reform in the Transition Economies. Economic Journal, 117(520), 858–881.
Douarin, E., & Mickiewicz, T. (2017). Transition as Institutional Change. In Economics of Institutional Change: Central and Eastern Europe Revisited (pp. 279–296). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Égert, B. (2018). Regulation, Institutions and Aggregate Investment: New Evidence from OECD Countries. Open Economies Review, 29(2), 415–449.
Eichengreen, B. (2001). Capital Account Liberalization: What do Cross-Country Studies Tell Us? World Bank Economic Review, 15(3), 341–365.
Eichengreen, B., Gullapalli, R., & Panizza, U. (2011). Capital Account Liberalization, Financial Development and Industry Growth: A Synthetic View. Journal of International Money and Finance, 30(6), 1090–1106.
Estrin, S., Hanousek, J., Kocenda, E., & Svejnar, J. (2009). The Effects of Privatization and Ownership in Transition Economies. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(3), 699–728.
Fiori, G., Nicoletti, G., Scarpetta, S., & Schiantarelli, F. (2012). Employment Outcomes and the Interaction between Product and Labor Market Deregulation: Are They Substitutes or Complements?’. Economic Journal, 122(558), 79–104.
Foster, E., & Sonnenschein, H. (1970). Price Distortion and Economic Welfare. Econometrica, 38(2), 281–297.
Freund, C., & Bolaky, B. (2008). Trade, Regulations, and Income. Journal of Development Economics, 87(2), 309–321.
Gallego, F., & Loayza, N. (2002). The Golden Period for Growth in Chile: Explanations and Forecasts. In N. Loayza & R. Soto (Eds.), Economic Growth: Sources, Trends, and Cycles (pp. 417–463). Santiago, Chile: Central Bank of Chile.
Gates, S., Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1996). Complementarities in the Transition from Socialism: A Firm-Level Analysis. In J. McMillan & B. Naughton (Eds.), Reforming Asian Socialism: The Growth of Market Institutions (pp. 17–37). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Giannetti, M., & Ongena, S. (2012). Lending by Example: Direct and Indirect Effects of Foreign Banks in Emerging Markets. Journal of International Economics, 86(1), 167–180.
Gu, X., & Dong, B. (2011). A Theory of Financial Liberalisation: Why Are Developing Countries So Reluctant? The World Economy, 34(7), 1106–1123.
Hagedoorn, J., & Wang, N. (2012). Is There Complementarity or Substitutability between Internal and External R&D Strategies? Research Policy, 41(6), 1072–1083.
Hausmann, R., Rodrik, D., & Velasco, A. (2008). Growth Diagnostics. In J. Stiglitz & N. Serra (Eds.), The Washington Consensus Reconsidered: Towards a New Global Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.
Havrylyshyn, O. (2006). Divergent Paths in Post Communist Transformation: Capitalism for All or Capitalism for the Few? Houndsmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Havrylyshyn, O., & van Rooden, R. (2003). Institutions Matter in Transition, But So Do Policies. Comparative Economic Studies, 45(1), 2–24.
Iwasaki, I., & Kumo, K. (2019). J-curve in Transition Economies: A Large Meta-analysis of the Determinants of Output Changes. Comparative Economic Studies, 61(1), 149–191.
Iwasaki, I., & Mizobata, S. (2018). Post-privatization Ownership and Firm Performance: A Large Meta-analysis of the Transition Literature. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 89(2), 263–322.
Jordà, Ò. (2005). Estimation and Inference of Impulse Responses by Local Projections. American Economic Review, 95(1), 161–182.
Katz, B., & Owen, J. (1993). Privatization: Choosing the Optimal Time Path. Journal of Comparative Economics, 17(4), 715–736.
Klein, M. W., & Olivei, G. P. (2008). Capital Account Liberalization, Financial Depth, and Economic Growth. Journal of International Money and Finance, 27(6), 861–875.
Kohpaiboon, A. (2006). Foreign Direct Investment and Technology Spillover: A Cross-industry Analysis of Thai Manufacturing. World Development, 34(3), 541–556.
Kornai, J. (1994). Transformational Recession: The Main Causes. Journal of Comparative Economics, 19(1), 39–63.
Kornai, J. (2001). Hardening the Budget Constraint: The Experience of the Post-socialist Countries. European Economic Review, 45(9), 1573–1599.
Li, W. (1999). A Tale of Two Reforms. RAND Journal of Economics, 30(1), 120–136.
Lipsey, R. G., & Lancaster, K. (1956). The General Theory of Second Best. Review of Economic Studies, 24(1), 11–32.
Macedo, J. B. de, & Oliveira Martins, J. (2008). Growth, Reform Indicators and Policy Complementarities. Economics of Transition, 16(2), 141–164.
Macedo, J. B., Oliveira Martins, J., & da Rocha, B. T. (2014). Are Complementary Reforms a “Luxury” for Developing Countries? Journal of Comparative Economics, 42(2), 417–435.
Makki, S. S., & Somwaru, A. (2004). Impact of Foreign Direct Investment and Trade on Economic Growth: Evidence from Developing Countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(3), 795–801.
Manlagnit, M. (2011). The Economic Effects of Foreign Bank Presence: Evidence from the Philippines. Journal of International Money and Finance, 30(6), 1180–1194.
Martin, P., & Rey, H. (2006). Globalization and Emerging Markets: With or Without Crash? American Economic Review, 96(5), 1631–1651.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1995). Complementarities and Fit Strategy, Structure, and Organizational Change in Manufacturing. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19(2–3), 179–208.
Mohnen, P., & Röller, L. H. (2005). Complementarities in Innovation Policy. European Economic Review, 49(6), 1431–1450.
Neary, J. P. (2009). Trade Costs and Foreign Direct Investment. International Review of Economics and Finance, 18(2), 207–218.
OECD. (2000). OECD Economic Surveys: Baltic States, a Regional Economic Assessment. Paris.
OECD. (2002). OECD Economic Surveys: Romania. Paris.
Oliveira Martins, J., & Price, T. (2000). Policy Interdependence during Economic Transition: The Case of Slovakia 1999–2000. OECD Economics Department Working Papers 253.
Orszag, M., & Snower, D. (1998). Anatomy of Policy Complementarities. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 5(2), 303–343.
Prasad, E., & Rajan, R. G. (2008). A Pragmatic Approach to Capital Account Liberalization. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(3), 149–172.
Punthakey, J. (2014). Exploring Policy Complementarities in Transition Economies: The Case of Kazakhstan. OECD Regional Development Working Papers, 2014/09.
Qian, Y. (1994). A Theory of Shortage in Socialist Economies Based on the Soft Budget Constraint. American Economic Review, 84(1), 145–156.
Restuccia, D., & Rogerson, R. (2017). The Causes and Costs of Misallocation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(3), 151–174.
Rocha, B. T. da. (2015). Let the Markets Begin: The Interplay between Free Prices and Privatisation in Early Transition. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43(2), 350–370.
Rocha, B. T. da. (2019). Structural Reforms as a System: Complementarities between Trade Openness, Capital Account Liberalisation, and Banking Sector Reform. Paper presented at the Annual Development Economics and Policy Conference (Research Group on Development Economics, German Economic Association), June 2019, Berlin.
Rodrik, D. (2006). Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion? A Review of the World Bank’s Economic Growth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade of Reform. Journal of Economic Literature, 44(4), 973–987.
Roland, G. (2000). Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets, and Firms. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.
Sonin, K. (2013). The End of Economic Transition. Economics of Transition, 21(1), 1–10.
Staehr, K. (2005). Reforms and Economic Growth in Transition Economies: Complementarity, Sequencing and Speed. European Journal of Comparative Economics, 2(2), 177–202.
Taboada, A. G. (2011). The Impact of Changes in Bank Ownership Structure on the Allocation of Capital: International Evidence. Journal of Banking and Finance, 35(10), 2528–2543.
Topkis, D. M. (1998). Supermodularity and Complementarity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Wolf, H. (1999). Transition Strategies: Choices and Outcomes. Princeton Studies in International Finance 85. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Zinnes, C., Eilat, Y., & Sachs, J. (2001). The Gains from Privatization in Transition Economies: Is “Change of Ownership” Enough? IMF Staff Papers, 48(1), 146–170.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Oliveira-Martins, J., da Rocha, B.T. (2021). Reform Design Matters: The Role of Structural Policy Complementarities. In: Douarin, E., Havrylyshyn, O. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Comparative Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50888-3_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50888-3_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50887-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50888-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)