Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:39:43.239Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crisis in Eastern Europe: The Downside of a Market Economy Revealed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Herman W. Hoen
Herman W. Hoen*
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations & International Organization, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

After the collapse of communism, the Central and Eastern European countries decided to implement a market economy embedded in a democratic order. A constituent element of the transition was a fully-fledged integration with the global economy. One of the consequences of this integration is that the countries are now severely hit by the financial crisis. Until recently, however, it all looked flourishing and economic growth figures indicated a steady catch up with average welfare levels in the European Union (EU). On the website of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development an essay competition was launched for those who were born in 1989. In an introductory statement, a Russian joke is quoted: ‘Everything the Communists told us about communism was a complete and utter lie. Unfortunately, everything the Communists told us about capitalism turned out to be true’.1 This article addresses the impact of the financial crisis in Central and Eastern Europe and in essence starts from this quote. It seeks to explain the extent to which the financial crisis in the Central and Eastern Europe question reveals the downside of a capitalist system embedded in a global economic order.

Type
Focus: Globalization
Information
European Review , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 2011 , pp. 31 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Academia Europaea 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References and Notes

1. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Born in ’89 Essay Competition, http://www.ebrd.com/bornin89/index.htm (assessed November 23, 2009).Google Scholar
2.Bideleux, R. and Jeffries, I. (1998) A History of Eastern Europe. Crisis and Change (London & New York: Routledge), p. 562 ff.Google Scholar
3.Wagener, H.-J. (1992) System, order and change – on evolution and transformation of economic systems. In: J. van den Broeck and D. Van den Bulcke (eds) Changing Economic Order (Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff), p. 7.Google Scholar
4.Lavigne, M. (1999) The Economics of Transition. From Socialist Economy to Market Economy, (Basingstoke: Macmillan), p. 41 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Murrell, P. (1995) Transition according to Cambridge Mass., Journal of Economic Literature, 33, pp. 164–178; M. Bruno (1992) Stabilization and reform in Eastern Europe. A preliminary evaluation. IMF Staff Papers, 39, pp. 319–347.Google Scholar
6.European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2009) Transition Report 2009: Transition in Crisis (London).Google Scholar
7.Kornai, J. (1980) The Economics of Shortage (Amsterdam: North-Holland).Google Scholar
8.Lavigne, M. (1999) The Economics of Transition. From Socialist Economy to Market Economy (Basingstoke: Macmillan), p. 114 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Åslund, A. (2002) Building Capitalism. The Transformation of the former Soviet Bloc (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
10.Dewatripont, M. and Roland, G. (1992) The virtues of gradualism and legitimacy in the transition to a market economy. The Economic Journal, 102, pp. 291–300; P. Murrell (1992) Evolution in economics and in the economic reform of the centrally planned economies. In: Ch. Clague and G. C. Rausser (ed.) The Emergence of Market Economies in Eastern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Hoen, H. W. (1996) ‘Shock versus gradualism’ in Central Europe reconsidered. Comparative Economic Studies, 38, pp. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Poznanski, K. Z. (2002) The crisis of transition as a state crisis. In: F. Bönker, K. Muller and A. Pickel (eds) Postcommunist Transformation and the Social Sciences. Cross-Disciplinary Approaches (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield), p. 61.Google Scholar
13.Winiecki, J. (1993) ‘Heterodox’ stabilisation in Eastern Europe. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Working Paper No. 8.Google Scholar
14.Murrell, P. (1995) Transition according to Cambridge Mass., Journal of Economic Literature, 33, pp. 164–178.Google Scholar
15.Calvo, G. A. and Coricelli, F. (1993) Output collapse in Eastern Europe: the role of credit. IMF Staff Papers, 40, pp. 35–52.Google Scholar
16.Havrylyshyn, O., Izvorski, I. and van Rooden, R. (2001) Recovery and growth in transition economies, 1990–97. In: H. W. Hoen (ed.) Good Governance in Central and Eastern Europe. The Puzzle of Capitalism by Design (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), pp. 26–53.Google Scholar
17.European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (various years). Transition Report (London: EBRD).Google Scholar
18.van Brabant, J. M. (1998) Eastern Europe and the World Trade Organization. The present position and prospects of accession. In: I. Zloch-Christy (ed.) Eastern Europe and the World Economy. Challenges of Transition and Globalization (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), pp. 152 ff.Google Scholar
19.Roland, G. (2002) The political economy of transition. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, pp. 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. A currency board is monetary authority that has to secure a fixed exchange-rate. The Central Bank is subordinate to this authority. The institutional device is meant to show the outside world the commitment to restrictive monetary and fiscal policy. Latvia soon abandoned the currency board and introduced a system of fixed exchange rate. But given the extra restrictions that were implemented, the regime de facto remained a currency board.Google Scholar
21. These are the so-called ‘convergence criteria’, also known as Maastricht criteria, referred to in Article 121 of the European Communities. See European Central Bank, http://www.ecb.int/ecb/orga/escb/html/convergence-criteria.en.html (assessed December 7, 2009). In the context of this paper, the long-term interest rates are not taken into account.Google Scholar
22.European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2009) Transition Report 2009. Transition in Crisis? (London: EBRD), pp. 172–175.Google Scholar
23.Hoen, H. W. (2009) Slowaakse Auto-industrie onder druk. Ablak, 14, pp. 10–13.Google Scholar
24.European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2009) Transition Report 2009. Transition in Crisis? (London: EBRD), pp. 204–207.Google Scholar
25. See International Monetary Fund, http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2009/102609.htm (accessed December 7, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar