Bright Past, Shady Future? Past and Potential Future Export Performance of CEE Countries in a Comparative Perspective

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract In this paper we examine the reasons behind the remarkable export performance of transition economies in the last two decades. Following Venables (2004, 2004a) and Fugazza (2004), we decompose export performance into the gains due to the advantageous access to foreign markets and export gains on the side of the internal supply capacity. We …nd that size of the economy, inward FDI penetration, most notably in the manufacturing sector, export unit values, denoting the structural changes of CEECs'exports, and the quality of institutions and infrastructure had signi…cant positive impact on exporting country's supply capacity, while productivity had a negative impact. The latter is mostly due to unfavourable trends in ULC since the accession. Unlike in EU-15 and BRIC countries, the internal supply capacity is becoming decreasingly important as base of CEECs export performance. At the same time, trends in cost competitiveness are worsening relative to competing countries, while bene…ts of EU accession have been mostly exploited. This may compromise the CEECs'future export growth. Terms of use: Documents in

Innovation and the Export Performance of Firms in Transition Economies: the Relevance of the Business Environment and the Stage of Transition

“…Nevertheless, various authors (Holger 1999;Damijan et al, 2015: among others) have highlighted the differences between these countries based on their progress to higher stages of transition. Damijan et al (2015) argue that high export growth in absolute and relative terms has made export performance an outstanding feature of the transition process and the process of integration of CEECs in the EU. Havlik et al (2001) emphasise that the competitive position of CEECs has generally improved in comparison to other non-EU competitors through their supply capacity.…”

“…Havlik et al (2001) emphasise that the competitive position of CEECs has generally improved in comparison to other non-EU competitors through their supply capacity. The low labour cost in the early stage of transition (Havlik, 2000) and the modification of export structure towards goods with higher value added (Damijan et al, 2015) at later stages of transition increased their market shares on foreign markets, especially in the EU-15.…”

“…The evidence suggests that the average quality of goods produced by firms in CEECs has increased and competition strategy has moved to quality rather than price competition (Benkovskis and Wörz, 2012). At the same time, the nature of innovation activities has also changed, from minor upgrades and differentiation of traditional products based on low cost and low prices (Damijan et al, 2015) to higher level product and process innovation aimed at quality improvements.…”

“…The quality of institutions, an important feature of the transition process, has been shown to be an essential factor in growing export performance (Rodrik et al, 2004;Damijan et al, 2015). Kaminski et al (1996, p.46) argue that "…establishment of market-supporting institutions was perhaps the single most important factor determining foreign trade performance over the transitional period."…”

“…Kaminski et al (1996, p.46) argue that "…establishment of market-supporting institutions was perhaps the single most important factor determining foreign trade performance over the transitional period." Further, Damijan et al (2015) suggest that those CEECs which are more ambitious in their on-going structural reforms and the building of a stable institutional setup are more successful in fostering export growth. Gurau and Dana (2010) argue that most of the business barriers, such as bureaucracy, corruption, inflation, economic instability, lack of legal enforcement and lack of supporting services show a decreasing tendency in the later stages of transition.…”