A Comparative Study of Institutional Quality and Economic Performance of Selected Post-Transition Countries from Central and Eastern Europe

Abstract

This study compares the institutional and economic indicators of selected post-transition countries in Central and Eastern Europe following the transition process. These countries have experienced institutional and economic transformations over the past few decades. They have achieved varying degrees of success in shifting from centrally planned to market economies and adopting democratic institutions. Despite the varying success, each country has significantly improved their economic and democratic institutions. This study aims to compare the progress of the post-transition countries and identify any commonalities or differences in their institutional and economic indicators. Additionally, it provides insight into the effectiveness of the transition process and its effects on the economic performance of the countries in question. It also identifies the key factors that have enabled several countries to succeed more than others in their transition processes. We employ IVGMM to assess the impact of institutional and transitional indicators on economic growth in selected post-transition European countries. Our sample contains data for 15 post-transition countries from Central and Eastern Europe (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia) from 2011-2021. The results indicate that in most countries, there is a positive correlation between institutional and transitional indicators and economic growth, suggesting that the countries in the sample have benefited from their transition to market economies. We conclude that the transition to market economies has positively impacted economic growth in the region.

Keywords: Transition economies, Ekonomik büyüme, Democratic institutions

Orta ve Do?u Avrupa’dan Baz? Seçilmi? Geçi? Süreci Sonras? Ülkelerde Kurumsal Kalite ve Ekonomik Verimlilik Aras?nda Kar??la?t?rmal? bir Çal??ma

Özet

Bu çal??ma, Orta ve Do?u Avrupa’dan baz? seçilmi? geçi? süreci sonras? ülkelere ait kurumsal ve ekonomik göstergeleri kar??la?t?rmaktad?r. Bu ülkeler geçen birkaç on y?ldan bu yana kurumsal ve ekonomik dönü?ümler tecrübe etmi?lerdir. Merkezi planlama rejiminden piyasa ekonomisine geçme ve demokratik kurumlar? benimseme yönünde çe?itli derecelerde ba?ar? sa?lam??lard?r. Ba?ar? oranlar?ndaki de?i?en derecelere ra?men, ele al?nan her bir ülke ekonomik ve demokratik kurumlar?n? önemli ölçüde iyile?tirmi?lerdir. Bu çal??ma, bu seçilmi? geçi? süreci sonras? ülkelerdeki ilerlemeleri kar??la?t?rmay? ve bu ülkelere ait kurumsal ve ekonomik göstergelerdeki benzerlik ve farklar? tespit etmeyi hedeflemektedir. Buna ilaveten bu çal??ma, geçi? sürecinin etkinli?i ve bu sürecin bu ülkelerdeki ekonomik verimlili?e etkileri hakk?nda bir görü? sa?lamaktad?r. Ayr?ca bu çal??ma, geçi? sürecinde birtak?m ülkelerin di?erlerine göre daha ba?ar?l? olmalar?ndaki temel etkenleri belirlemektedir. Kurumsal ve geçi?sel göstergelerin bu seçilmi? geçi? süreci sonras? Avrupa ülkelerinin ekonomik büyümelerine olan etkilerini de?erlendirmek üzere IVGMM metodunu kulland?k. Veri setimiz, Orta ve Do?u Avrupa’dan baz? seçilmi? geçi? süreci sonras? 15 adet ülkeyi (Arnavutluk, Bosna-Hersek, Bulgaristan, H?rvatistan, Çek Cumhuriyeti, Estonya, Macaristan, Latviya, Litvanya, Kuzey Makedonya, Polonya, Romanya, S?rbistan, Slovakya Cumhuriyeti, ve Slovenya) ve 2011-2021 dönemini kapsamaktad?r. Bulgular göstermi?tir ki, birçok ülkede kurumsal ve geçi?sel göstergeler ile ekonomik büyüme aras?nda pozitif bir korelasyon vard?r, ve bu durum inceledi?imiz bu ülkelerin piyasa ekonomisine geçmekten fayda elde ettiklerini ima etmektedir. Sonuç olarak diyebiliriz ki, piyasa ekonomisine geçi? bu bölgedeki ekonomik büyümeyi olumlu yönde etkilemi?tir.

Anahtar kelimeler: Geçi? ekonomileri, Economic growth, Demokratik kurumlar

Ph.D. candidate Gunter Merdzan (Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia)
0000-0002-1894-9623  gjunter.merdzan@eccf.ukim.edu.mk

Prof. Dr. Trajko Slaveski (Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia)
0000-0003-0268-4760  slaveski@eccf.ukim.edu.mk

Submitted on: 2023-10-01 Accepted on: 2024-01-08

Year:2024 - Volume:3 Issue:1 Pages: 17-31

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36880/J03.1.0129

Download as PDF

APA style citation: Merdzan, G. , & Slaveski, T. (2024). A Comparative Study of Institutional Quality and Economic Performance of Selected Post-Transition Countries from Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Eurasian Economies, 3(1), 17-31.

References

• Afonso, O. (2020). The impact of institutions on economic growth in OECD countries. Applied Economics Letters, 29(1), 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2020.1855304
• Busse, M., & Hefeker, C. (2007). Political risk, institutions and foreign direct investment. European Journal of Political Economy, 23(2), 397–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2006.02.003
• Buterin, V., Škare, M., & Buterin, D. (2017). Macroeconomic model of institutional reforms’ influence on economic growth of the new EU members and the Republic of Croatia. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 1572–1593. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2017.1355260
• Catrinescu, N., Leon-Ledesma, M., Piracha, M., & Quillin, B. (2009). Remittances, Institutions, and Economic Growth. World Development, 37(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.02.004
• Gwartney, J. D., Holcombe, R. G., & Lawson, R. A. (2006). Institutions and the Impact of Investment on Growth. Kyklos, 59, 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.2006.00327.x
• Hamadi, F., Rihab, B.A., & Lotfi, B.J. (2009). Governance and economic growth in transition countries: a reading in the vision of the institutional theory. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 2(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEPEE.2009.022937
• Moers, L. (1999). How important are Institutions for Growth in Transition Countries? Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers.
• North, D. C. (1987). Institutions, Transaction Costs and Economic Growth. Economic Inquiry, 25(3), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1987.tb00750.x
• North, D. C. (1989). Institutions and economic growth: An historical introduction. World Development, 17(9), 1319–1332. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(89)90075-2
• North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
• Redek, T., & Sušjan, A. (2005). The Impact of Institutions on Economic Growth: The Case of Transition Economies. Journal of Economic Issues, 39(4), 995–1027. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2005.11506864
• Rodrik, D. (2000). Institutions for high-quality growth: What they are and how to acquire them. St Comp Int Dev 35, 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02699764
• Rodrik, D. (2007). One Economics, Many Recipes: Globalization, Institutions, and Economic Growth. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4jbh
• Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037.
• Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71–S102.
• Valeriani, E., & Peluso, S. (2011). The Impact of Institutional Quality on Economic Growth and Development: An Empirical Study. Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics, and Information Technology, 1(6), 25.
• Zghidi, N., Sghaier, I.M., & Abida, Z. (2018). Remittances, Institutions, and Economic Growth in North African Countries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9, 804–821.