is to confirm that in defining anti-crisis measures for late developer in delayed transition industrial policy is a common sense institutional choice with deep theoretical roots and unquestionable practical results.

Serbia's economic crisis is not cyclical, but structural. Our starting point is that reindustrialization is the cornerstone of the anti-crisis program and the road map for coordinated response to the crisis. The article incorporates four sections, along with Introduction and Conclusion. The first part reviews the macroeconomic situation in the mid-2013. The analysis indicates that anti-crisis program is imperative due to large output gap resulting from deindustrialization. The second part of the article analyzes the concept and the main components of anti-crisis program. The third part provides economic policy proposals for reindustrialization. Finally, we identify priority sectors for reindustrialization.For the most part, economics is not an exact science. This particularity allows that everybody thinks they know it, especially politicians. That is why economics often has no further scope than a gizmo science in the hands of politicians. Given that, this article represents an attempt to provide contribution from microeconomic (or business) perspective, while not ignoring macroeconomic one, to exit from profound and overwhelming crisis into which Serbia persistently sinks.As business economics professionals, we share certain shame that a nation which can be proud of Nikola Tesla and Mihajlo Pupin, as well as of many great people from the field of theoretical and applied engineering, has not been able to create level playing field for development of industrial economy. Adequate institutional framework encourages technological development as well as commercial use of innovations in tradable sectors and, consequently, fosters an economic and social development which could make Serbia comparable with other European countries. The future of our future must be brighter than the time we are facing today. It will not be easy because we must simultaneously eliminate the burden from the past and adapt the economy to transformative global discontinuity challenges. SažetakKriza u Srbiji nije ciklične, već strukturne prirode. Naša polazišna tač-ka je da je reindustrijalizacija okosnica antikriznog programa i izvodljiva putanja za koordinirani odgovor na krizu. Rad se sastoji iz četiri dela, pored uvoda i zaključka. Prvi deo daje pregled makroekonomske situacije na polovini 2013. godine. Analiza nedvosmisleno upućuje na neophodnost antikriznog programa zbog postojanja ogromnog autput gepa kao posledice deindustrijalizacije. Drugi deo se bavi konceptualnim okvirom i osnovnim komponentama antikriznog programa. Treći deo sadrži predloge za ekonomske politike bitne za reindustrijalizaciju. U četvr-tom delu identifikovani su prioritetni sektori koje treba obuhvatiti procesom reindustrijalizacije.U najvećoj meri, ekonomija nije egzaktna nauka. Ova osobenost omogućuje da svi misle da je znaju, naročito političari. Upravo iz tog razloga ekonomija često ostaje samo igračka u rukama političara. Ovaj rad predstavlja pokušaj da se iz mikroekonomskog (ili poslovnog) ugla, ne zanemarujući makroekonomski, da doprinos izlasku iz du...

ce of the real and market value of different kinds of assets. Second, crisis ends, also, when asset prices, debt levels, and factors' income get back into the balance. When the new balance is met, economic expectations will rise, new investment cycle will start, and economy will leave the crisis. Until then, new economic policies must correct all structural instabilities and create the fundaments for recovery.Policy makers in Serbia must react to the main transitional contradiction that achieved price stability is not followed with sustainable employment. The first step in this reaction is to understand the complexity of the crisis and to identify its seeds. In our latest article [3], we intended to identify the seeds of the Serbia's economic crisis and to figure out the feasible solutions predominantly from microeconomic perspective. In this article we shift the focus to macroeconomic perspective. Again, industrial policies are at the core of feasible solution. This is what this paper attempts to explain. It proceeds in five parts. The first and second part review common macroeconomic "M" as a bottom line in macroeconomic analysis and economic policy modeling, respectively. The third and fourth part analyze Serbia's macroeconomic "M" and related economic policies, respectively. The fifth part identifies industrial policies as a main tool for elimination of structural imbalances and competitiveness gap. Also, in this part we propose the roadmap for exit from the crisis..H\ ZRUGV 6HUELD

No abstract

respond quickly and accurately to the universe of risk stressors. Serbia's economy is underdeveloped, with delay in transition, catching up and income convergence with developed economies from its surroundings. Vulnerability indicators and cross section analysis of macroeconomic data indicate the presence of many anomalies in the system. The main contradiction is deindustrialization which, combined with relatively high financialization, produces output gap, macro deficits, and growing indebtedness. Coming up with a new growth model that will put the economy in line with the future is not an easy endeavor when an economy is encumbered with serious structural imbalances from the past and risk stressors influencing its future position.Having in mind the fact that right now the economy is not sustainable, the main challenge for Serbia is not its future, but how to survive it? Multipronged reform agenda is the way to escape from structural crisis and get adequate answers to leading trends in order to shift the economy to sustainable and inclusive growth trajectory. Discussing how Serbia's economy would benefit from right answers to previously raised question, is a very specific purpose of this paper.The paper is organized into five parts, apart from conclusion. The first two sections are dedicated to principal drivers of change, new normality in socio-economic context and industrial revolution 4.0 affecting the new growth model and economic policy platform. The purpose of the third section is strategic audit of Serbia's economy at the end of 2015. The fourth part consists of a concise elaboration of the EU's major challenges, inspiring the reforms in Serbia, too. The fifth and sixth part provide an overview of currents stage of reforms and proposals for multipronged reforms considering the intersection of new context, economic fact sheets in Serbia and the EU and leading trends. The new industrialization is a core idea. AbstractHypercompetition, sometimes referred to as "universal transformative global discontinuity", is the greatest challenge the mankind faces today. The key characteristics of this stage of development are: hiking up of risk stressors and disruptive innovations. Great volatility of global markets is a consequence of permanent shortening of life cycle of almost everything relevant to them (growth model concepts, geopolitical interests, regulations, business models, supply chains, technologies, products, etc.). Maybe more than ever in modern history, we live in a time of profound changes. New normality creates a significant impact on politics, economy, and society. From many perspectives, it is a pivotal moment for mankind.The main attributes of this stage of development pertain to the vast impact of new normality coming from socio-political context, reflected in financialization, concentration of wealth, massive spillover effects of geopolitics on the economy (particularly on commodity prices), climate changes and security challenges, as well as the impact of technology development (this time inspire...