Europeanization, Varieties of Capitalism and Economic Performance in Central and Eastern Europe

Cernat, Lucian

doi:10.1057/9780230501683

Cited by 66 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Evidence From the Voc Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main reason for this is the arbitrary mix of the development of the various market economic institutions, stemming from various types of established capitalist economies. Cernat (2006) calls this "cocktail capitalism". The main problem of this system is that the components do not fit together if they come from economies working with differing logics.…”

Section: Evidence From the Voc Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Berrou and Carrincazeaux (2005) ran a cluster analysis and found the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary to be the Mediterranean model. Cernat (2006) found -quite surprisingly -that Bulgaria, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia were continental and the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia rather Asian.An important segment of the literature strongly emphasizes the relationships between the economic system and political stability, and differentiates between liberal and non-liberal (patrimonial) models of capitalism in the transition economies. King (2007) compares two models: the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary (as liberal and dependent countries) with Russia, Ukraine, Romania and Serbia (patrimonial states).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Varieties of development paths in post communist countries with special regard to the transition in Hungary

Szanyi

2012

competitio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Varieties of development paths in post communist countries with special regard to the transition in HungaryTransition in Central and Eastern Europe was carried out in various ways. However, the different countries' current economic structure, institutions and main economic performance measures are rather similar. Central-and Eastern European countries underwent two major systemic changes in the 20th century. Both of them were directed by some kind of uniform ideological background. In the case of Central Europe the socialist transition was engineered to fit Soviet models and political expectations. This doctrinaire policy lasted for a long period in some countries (Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria or the GDR), while Yugoslavia, Hungary and Poland experimented with variations to the model in order to overcome some of the most severe bottlenecks of the socialist economic system (e.g. lack of price orientation, low level of working morale and incentives). Nevertheless, strong state paternalism, soft budget constraints, isolation from world markets and international competition remained in place. Still, the communist experience of Central-European countries was not totally uniform. The question asked is whether these countries follow a specific kind of development model? What seems likely is that they differ substantially from CIS countries in many aspects. But they also seem to differ from existing models of capitalism more than they do from each-other. Based on this information, the varieties of capitalism literature assumes that such a model does indeed exist. However, no comprehensive positive description of the model has so far been provided. This paper tries to define the main elements of the Szanyi Miklós a Debreceni Egyetem Miklós SzanyiThe second systemic change was back to a market economy. At the very beginning of the process the Washington Consensus was still in place and international organizations and advisers recommended the neoliberal transition treatment expressed in the acronym SLIP (stabilization, liberalization, institution building and privatization). Although advisers' opinions changed rather slowly, the various transition economies applied SLIP with wide variations in sequencing and timing. Some elements were postponed or never implemented. In the case of institution building a large variety of models was used. Hence, transition economies have developed in largely different ways during the past 25 years. Uniformity has remained in place only in terms of international organizations and financial institutions. These have continued to evaluate transition and economic performance using sometimes rather arbitrary, uniform schemes of measurement.Thus, after almost 25 years the transition process has created quite differing new market economic systems in Central and Eastern Europe. At the same time, new branches of economic thought have become established that compared the transition process and the variety of capitalist systems in order to find best practices. The varieties of capitalism (VoC) literature ...

show abstract

Section: Evidence From the Voc Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence From the Voc Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Varieties of development paths in post communist countries with special regard to the transition in Hungary

Szanyi

2012

competitio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this reason, they came to a somewhat unconventional division of the types of capitalism: Capitalism from without (Central Europe countries), capitalism from above (Russia, Romania, Serbia) and capitalism from below (China and Vietnam). This typology is, according to Bluhm (2014: 2), a combination of the emerging new type of ownership with the traditional thinking that indicates the penetration of modern capitalism and the rational bureaucracy and functional separation Cernat (2006) divided the transition economies into three types: The Anglo-Saxon post-socialist capitalism, the Continental post-socialist capitalism and the developmental state. The main criteria of differentiation are: The dominant type of wage bargaining, the state interventionism, the role of the banking sector and financial institutions, the degree of internal institutional inherence.…”

Section: Approach To Define the Models Of Economic Systems In Postsomentioning

confidence: 99%

Formation of the theoretical framework for the comparative analysis of post-socialist countries

Cihelkova¹

2016

AGR ECON-CZECH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th e beginning of the 90s was accompanied by revolutionary changes in the world economy. Newly created incentives for the comparative economics/economy were tackling, inter alia, the post-socialist countries, that were already exposed to the transformation and reform processes. Models of economic systems formed in this period have initiated a great discussion among the relevant stakeholders. Th is fruitful discussion has led to the creation of a number of model approaches, focusing on the defi nition of a common theoretical framework for the comparative analysis and its further applications within the surrounding of particularly advanced concrete modern economies. Th e presented paper contains newly emerged approaches, the so-called varieties of capitalism. Th e aim of the paper is: To explore the approaches typical for "the varieties of capitalism", that could be considered as the mainstream over the last 25 years, and to deliver their review; then to map the approaches how the models of economic systems of post-socialist countries are defi ned, and to answer a question, whether the varieties of capitalism can be used for the comparative analysis of economic systems of these countries.

show abstract

“…In the last two decades, several attempts have been made to compare CEE countries with the existing models, but these cover only a few countries, or the scope of the applied data and viewpoint is not as wide as in the case of the old capitalist countries (e.g., Blanke and Hoffmann, 2008;Buchen, 2007;Cernat, 2006;Csaba, 2009;Feldmann, 2007;Lane, 2007;King, 2007;Knell and Srholec, 2007;Mykhnenko, 2007;Schweickert et al, 2013). Nölke and Vliegenhart (2009) prepare a thorough inventory of the attempts made so far in the framework of VoC to classify the market economies that have emerged in the transition countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Market Economies of the Western Balkans Compared to the Central and Eastern European Model of Capitalism

Farkas

2017

CES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using the Central and Eastern European model of capitalism, this paper compares the market economies of the Western Balkan countries to the postsocialist European Union member states. It analyzes the main institutional areas of a socio-economic system such as product markets, innovation system, financial system, labor market and industrial relations, social protection and the educational system. The comparison of institutional systems does not provide an unambiguous answer to the question of whether the Western Balkan market economies fit into the model. There are many similarities between the institutional arrangements of the two regions, and the differences seem to be a consequence of delayed reforms rather than of an alternative model. However, the question of whether the current differences will be institutionalized or whether they will create a new normality-a new, distinct model of capitalism-remains open. Beáta Farkas

show abstract

Europeanization, Varieties of Capitalism and Economic Performance in Central and Eastern Europe

Cited by 66 publications

References 0 publications

Varieties of development paths in post communist countries with special regard to the transition in Hungary

Varieties of development paths in post communist countries with special regard to the transition in Hungary

Formation of the theoretical framework for the comparative analysis of post-socialist countries

Market Economies of the Western Balkans Compared to the Central and Eastern European Model of Capitalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About