Transformation crisis in post‐socialist countries: patterns and causes

Zukowski, Ryszard

doi:10.1108/03068299610149598

“…Although some reforms began in Russia in 1985 when Gorbachev came to power, their nature was mainly political rather than economic (Boone and Fedorov, ). At the same time, countries in Central Europe such as Poland and Hungary (also Yugoslavia in Southeast Europe) had a relatively decentralised economy with significant private entrepreneurial activities (Gupta, ; Lin, ; Zukowski, ). In reform‐socialist countries (China, Vietnam, Poland and Hungary) first so called ‘local markets’ emerged.…”

Section: Pathways From Planning To Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The poverty rate jumped significantly and life expectancy declined substantially in the CEE region (Szelényi, ). However, the recession in Russia and other post‐Soviet Eastern European countries was deeper and lasted longer than in Central Europe where, many scholars believe, early economic reforms and the relatively large group of entrepreneurs helped to resist more serious transformation shocks (Swaan and Lissowska, ; Zukowski, ; Smallbone and Welter, ). This ‘pretransition market microfoundation’ softened the impacts of the transformation crisis (Cruz and Seleny, ).…”

Section: Pathways From Planning To Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Planning to Market: A Framework for Cuba

Font

¹

,

Jancsics

²

2015

Bull Latin American Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The measures introduced by Raúl Castro since 2008 and the most recent US-Cuba policy change indicate that Cuba is shifting from a planned and highly centralised state socialist economic model toward one in which economic actors and markets become main drivers of the economy. The examples of Asian and Central and Eastern European socialist countries suggest four distinguished pathways for such transition. The question is which one may provide a feasible model for Cuba. Based on the country's economic and population structure, this study places the Cuban case within the framework of socialist economic transitions and explores some policy implications.

show abstract

“…189-90;Olsevich, 1997a, pp. 255-77;Zukowski, 1996), "post-Communist Great Depression" (Milanovic, 1998, pp. 23-30), "Trap of Reforms" (Klaus, 1997, p. 184), the cause of which lies not in the essence of "Shock Therapy", but rather in the negation of the latter (Mau, 1999, p. 11), delays in implementing reforms (Å slund, 2001b), and of course, in the collapse of the old system (Sachs, 1994, Ch.…”

Section: Post-communist Economic Transitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the theory of post‐Communist economic transition to market

Papava¹

2005

International Journal of Social Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The paper investigates the utility of economic theory for post-Communist economic transformation. It serves to explain the main reasons for market reform failure in different post-Communist countries. Design/methodology/approach -A literature review suggests that after the collapse of the Communist system there was no economic theory of transition to market. Whenever one considers the transition of post-Communist economies to a market system (which, in fact, is nothing but post-Communist transition to capitalist economies), it has to be placed on record, as this kind of transition has no precedent in history. Findings -The main mistake of gradualists stems from their overlooking some very important conditions for successful transition: political guarantees and internal assets for reforms. And the success of shock therapy rests on the paradox, "the worse, the better". Originality/value -There is as yet no special economic theory of post-Communist transformation and it is just developing. This paper helps one to understand the main features of shock therapy and gradualism for designing the framework of such a theory. It is geared towards researchers and students interested in the theoretical aspects of the post-Communist economic transition to markets.

show abstract

On the Theory of Post-Communist Economic Transition to Market

Papava

¹

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The paper investigates the utility of economic theory for post-Communist economic transformation. It serves to explain the main reasons for market reform failure in different post-Communist countries. Design/methodology/approach -A literature review suggests that after the collapse of the Communist system there was no economic theory of transition to market. Whenever one considers the transition of post-Communist economies to a market system (which, in fact, is nothing but post-Communist transition to capitalist economies), it has to be placed on record, as this kind of transition has no precedent in history. Findings -The main mistake of gradualists stems from their overlooking some very important conditions for successful transition: political guarantees and internal assets for reforms. And the success of shock therapy rests on the paradox, "the worse, the better". Originality/value -There is as yet no special economic theory of post-Communist transformation and it is just developing. This paper helps one to understand the main features of shock therapy and gradualism for designing the framework of such a theory. It is geared towards researchers and students interested in the theoretical aspects of the post-Communist economic transition to markets.

show abstract

Transformation crisis in post‐socialist countries: patterns and causes

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

From Planning to Market: A Framework for Cuba

From Planning to Market: A Framework for Cuba

On the theory of post‐Communist economic transition to market

On the Theory of Post-Communist Economic Transition to Market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About