All
 
|
 
 


On the Economic Growth in Post-Communist Countries of Eastern Europe
 
PIIS042473880006769-4-1
DOI10.31857/S042473880006769-4
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Vladimer Papava 
Occupation: Professor at the Faculty of Economics and Business
Affiliation: Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Address: Tbilisi, Georgia
Journal nameEkonomika i matematicheskie metody
EditionVolume 56 Issue 1
Pages34-43
Abstract

 

The author discusses the main types of the economic growth and their application to the post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe. The paper introduces the notion of the extremely falling behind as the variety of the falling behind when the country has no considerable stock of primary resources while the available poor technological potential is not used properly. According to the “combinatorial augmentation” concept, the paper explains why the falling behind is more characteristic of the EU’s post-Communist countries than catching up. Particularly, according of the specific of the “combinatorial augmentation” process in the EU, the new technologies are mainly concentrated in some Western European and other developed countries while older technologies were mostly left for the other EU’s post-Communist countries. Unfortunately, the domestic innovation systems in these countries are weakly developed. As the result, the economic growth types of other Eastern European post-Communist countries are based on coat-tail growth, falling behind and extremely falling behind. The paper shows the difference between catching up and catch-up effect. Excluding the catch-up effect is of special importance for identification of real economic growth. The method based on the hypothesis of “proportional overlap” gives a more realistic picture for the quantitative assessment of the differences between economic growth indicators concerning an effect of catch-up start and without it. In order to diagnose the type of economic growth of the post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe, it is not enough to merely exclude the catch-up effect – it is necessary to use a whole system of indicators.

Keywordseconomic growth, catching up, falling behind, catch-up effect, post-Communist countries, Eastern Europe.
Received21.10.2019
Publication date20.03.2020
Number of characters25977
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 974

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Abramovitz M. (1986). Catching up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind. The Journal of Economic History, 46, 2, 385–406.
2. Abukhovich Y.K. (2011). Innovative Policy in the Countries of Eastern Europe: Problems and Prospects. Work. Trade Unions. Society, 2, 10–12 (in Russian).
3. Acemoglu D. (2009): Modern Economic Growth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
4. Aslund A., Djankov S. (2017). Europe’s Growth Challenge. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Barro R.J., Sala-i-Martin X. (2010). Economic Growth. Moscow: BINOM, Laboratory of Knowledge (in Russian).
6. Dunford M., Smith A. (2000). Catching up or Falling Behind? Economic Performance and Regional Trajectories in the “New Europe”. Economic Geography, 76, 2, 169–195.
7. Gottinger H.-W. (2005). Economic Growth, Catching up, Falling Behind and Getting Ahead. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 1, 2, 293–300.
8. Habibullah M.S., Din B.H., Sanusi N.A. (2017). Economic Growth and Catch-up Effect Between the Less Developed States and the Richer State of Selangor. International Journal of Economic Research, 14, 16, Part 2, 165–173.
9. Hudson E.A. (2015). Economic Growth: How it Works and How it Transformed the World. Wilmington: Vernon Press.
10. Mankiw G. (2004). Principles of Economics. Saint Petersburg: Piter Com (in Russian).
11. Matthews J.A. (2006). Catch-up Strategies and the Latecomer Effect in Industrial Development. New Political Economy, 11, 3, 313–335.
12. Nassif A., Feijo C., Araujo E. (2015). Structural Change and Economic Development: Is Brazil Catching up or Falling Behind? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39, 3, 1307–1332.
13. Nelson R.R., Winter S.G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Moscow: ZAO “Finstatinform” (in Russian).
14. Papava V. (2001). Necroeconomy — the Phenomenon of the Post-Communist Transition Period. Society and Economy, 5, 22–30 (in Russian).
15. Papava V. (2009). The Problem of Zombification of the Postcommunist Necroeconomy. The Bulletin of Institute of Kennan in Russia, 15, 37–48 (in Russian).
16. Papava V. (2012). Economic Growth in the Central Caucaso-Asian Countries Adjusted for the Catch-Up Effect. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 15, 4, 138–147 (in Russian).
17. Papava V. (2013). The Catch-up Effect and Regional Comparisons of Growth Indicators (with the Eastern Partnership Countries as an Example). Economy of Ukraine, 1, 59–66 (in Russian).
18. Papava V. (2016). The Problem of the Catch-up Effect and Post-Crises Economic Growth in the World Leading Countries. Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences, 10, 4, 97–104.
19. Papava V. (2017a). On Retroeconomy. Issues of Economics, 10, 148–159 (in Russian).
20. Papava V. (2017b). Retroeconomics — Moving from Dying to Brisk Economy. Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, 6, 455–462. Available at:  http://www.lifescienceglobal.com/independent-journals/journal-of-reviews-on-global-economics/volume-6/85-abstract/jrge/2929-abstract-retroeconomics-moving-from-dying-to-brisk-economy  (accessed: April 2019).
21. Papava V. (2018). Frontier Growth, Catching up, Falling Behind and Extremely Falling Behind. The Market Oracle. May 21. Available at: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article62332.html  (accessed: April 2019).
22. Shah S. (2002). Innovation Strategies in Central Europe: A Corporate Perspective. Centre for the Study of Economic and Social Change in Europe Working Paper No. 18. London: SSEES, UCL. Available at: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/17561/  (accessed: April 2019).
23. Spisak A. (2017). Central and Eastern Europe Unveils its Tech Ambitions. Financial Times, June 6. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/889422a8-09ad-11e7-ac5a-903b21361b43  (accessed: April 2019).
24. Stiglitz J., Sen A., Fitoussi J.-P. (2016). Mismeasuring our Lives: Why GDP Doesn’t add up. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara (in Russian).
25. Sukharev O.S. (2013). New Combinations in Economy and the Principle of Combinatorial Augmentation. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice, 25 (328), 2–13. Available at:  https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/novye-kombinatsii-v-ekonomike-i-printsip-kombinatornogo-narascheniya   (accessed: April 2019, in Russian).
26. UNIDO (2005). Capability Building for Catching-Up. Historical, Empirical and Policy Dimensions. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
27. Vlaskin G.A., Lenchuk E.B. (2005). Innovative Measurement of Industrial Policy of the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Innovations, 3 (80), 65–71 (in Russian).
28. WB (2018a). Economy. The World Bank. Available at: http://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/themes/economy.html  (accessed: April 2019).
29. WB (2018b). GDP Growth (Annual %). The World Bank. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG   (accessed: April 2019).
30. WB (2018c). GDP Per Capita, PPP (Current International $). The World Bank. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?end=2015&start=1990  (accessed: April 2019).
31. Weil D.N. (2005). Economic Growth. Boston: Pearson Education.
32. Wirkierman A.L., Ciarli T., Savona M. (2018). Varieties of European National Innovation Systems. ISI GRowth, Innovation-Fuelled, Sustainable, Inclusive Growth, Working Paper, 13/2018, May. Available at: http://www.isigrowth.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/working_paper_2018_13.pdf  (accessed: April 2019).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up