Economic Issues

“Was the economic transformation really necessary in Czechoslovakia?” The crux of the answer: “The GDP per capita in Czechoslovakia in the early 1950s was the same as in postwar Austria. After forty years of communist rule, the Austrian GDP per capita was five times higher.” 

“What is the assessment of the Czech voucher privatization?” To this the reader gets a complex answer including an appraisal of alternative options.
“How should we assess the transformation as a whole?” Zidek discusses three topics that he considers critical for broad evaluation of the process—political/democratic stability, development of GDP, and general direction of the transformation process. “The crucial indicator is the development of real wages… Noneconomic statistics improved as well. Average longevity increased, infant mortality decreased, and the environment improved dramatically.”
“It was an extremely difficult process full of unavoidable compromises and traps. But the overall transformation process is a success story.” 

“The objective of the GDR was to increase the economic returns from culture. The copyright system should encourage to be creative for the benefit of socialism and for the people. The GDR wanted to join the world economic scene and engagement with international copyright law was crucial.”
A book on the expansion and institutionalization of intellectual property norms.
“While copyright is highly compatible with market economies it does nothing to facilitate political resistance against state domination. Instead, copyright can be used as a tool to curb the exchange of information.”
“Post-communist copyright legislators had a twofold task: they had to adapt the old copyright system to the necessities of a modern market economy and had to find answers to the new problems raised by the technological, economic, and social developments.”
“Critics from peripheral states accuse patent law of protecting the special interests of rich states and multinational corporations. Critics at the center of the globalized world complain that copyright no longer serves workers in the cultural sector or the culture of a nation, but rather globally operating media concerns.” 

Titles from the backlist, contemporary topics on top, older themes below. 

“It is ironic that just eleven years after the split, in 2004, Slovakia became the regional leader in reforms, while the Czech Republic was the laggard.”
Scholars compare Czech and Slovak achievements and failures in the twenty years since independence, including in the economy.
“While the leading Czech economists preferred rapid privatization and minimal state intervention in the economy, many of their Slovak colleagues advocated for a more gradual form of transformation, producing a socially oriented market economy with relatively strong state participation.”
“Post-communist privatization programs created a short-term, high-stakes battle for the wealth and power of a country… Rather than restructuring enterprises, managers stripped them of cash; and rather than repay loans, partial enterprise owners pocketed the money and abandoned their asset-stripped firms to an inefficient bankruptcy process.”
“In the mid-2000s, the Czech Republic reached record GDP growth rates of over 6 percent, which subsequently led to a decrease in the unemployment rate to around 5 percent.”
“Slovakia’s success came largely in spite of Mečiar’s policy innovations, rather than because of them. The untested, but independent central bank retained a stable monetary supply throughout the Mečiar era. This ensured that Slovakia did not catch the Russian disease of hyperinflation.”
“While the Slovak gross domestic product during 1989–2005 grew by 33 percent, real wages in 2005 were still below the 1989 level. This is one of the main factors contributing to the competitiveness of the Slovak economy.” 

The economic transition can also be investigated with sophisticated empirical apparatus that compares 29 countries between the Baltic and the South China Sea. 

Popular political economy research has remained biased towards advanced countries and has neglected developing and transition economies. The adjustment problems of public finance in countries of Central and Eastern Europe are often misunderstood and misinterpreted by western scholars.
The main question posed in a very interesting application of 'new institutionalist' thinking of public finances in these countries is whether their economies require thinking regarding public finances different from that used in the rest of the developed world. Are transition economies so much different that none of the well-known mainstream political economy concepts or models can be applied to the analysis of fiscal performance in the region? Benczes and his contributors demonstrate that this is not the case at all... 

Trust is a source of economic growth. Satisfaction with democracy is a strong predictor of fiscal performance. Institutional trust is an enabling factor that facilitates the reaching of a country's growth potential. To what extent, and how to prove these suppositions empirically? While searching for answers, the comparative study had to address exceptions to the rule: countries that have performed well in spite of low trust (e.g. Poland). Also, the dilemma of austerity eroding public trust is a challenge. What lessons does history offer? 

An economist turned politician examines the roots of the current crisis and the flaws or weaknesses of the financial system in general and in Europe in particular. 

Why do some nations fail and others strive?—asks one of the best specialists in international economic relations. Development strategies pursued over the past century are sorted out as complete failure (the illusion of shortcut), incomplete failure (development economics) and incomplete success (economic freedom). “A country where the future has arrived—well, not quite…”—guess, which one? (Brazil.)
A penetrating, empirically based analysis of the concurrent development strategies unmasks the theoretical and philosophical fallacies of the statist systems and explains why they have failed economically.
A parable in the book contrasts the way a Polish socialist economist, and Milton Friedman, the would-be Nobel Prize winner looked upon female lipstick. For the one the state, while guiding the economy, should “decisively put a stop to the production of luxury versions of consumer goods,” while for the other lipstick was a typical case of “incentive consumer goods,” which raises the aspirations to consume and—consequently—to work, earn, and save. 

An erudite and sweeping essay on the political economy of transition from command to market economy celebrates the historic triumph of miracle over misery, “to learn more about the nature of this miracle to avoid new misery.” In today’s atmosphere and zeitgeist this book is a rare and spirited defence of market capitalism and liberal democracy, of Western civilization. The theme and the approach is similar to the analysis of transition from socialism to capitalism by one of the greatest authorities of the subject. 

“Both the political leadership of the USSR and its economic experts entertained an ongoing interest in economic cooperation with the West and particularly with the United States, and that these concepts can be traced back to Soviet economic diplomacy in the immediate postwar period.”
Contrary to today, the essays on the decades of “peaceful coexistence” (détente) present a United States based on principles and values much firmer than its West European allies with regard to Russia.
“West Germany swiftly became one of Moscow’s major trading partners and the ties established during the early 1970s were selfperpetuating, even after Willy Brandt’s fall from office. By 1975, West Germany had signed two more gas pipeline deals, again financed by German bank consortia to be repaid over decades to come with the exported natural gas. For West Germany, East-West trade had become a lucrative long-term investment in the Soviet economy.”
“The role of Basket II of the Helsinki Final Act in 1975 is generally underestimated—the economic cooperation originally seen in the East as a vehicle for consolidating the Soviet Bloc economies, by the end of the 1980s, became a catalyst in the collapse of the communist systems.”
“Carter’s call for sanctions fell mostly on deaf ears. When he pressured his European allies to sacrifice this economic cooperation during the summit meeting in Venice, in June 1980, the Europeans rejected Carter’s demands outright and complained about “being nagged and incorporated as America’s ‘51st state.’” 

From all schools of philosophy, positivism is closest to the economy as a practice and as an academic domain, particularly political economy. Since the beginnings, from the philosophy of progress expounded by Turgot, the comptroller general of Louis XVI, through the Principles of Political Economy by J.S. Mill up to The Methodology of Positive Economics by Friedman, most exponents of positivism also cultivated economic theories, or vice versa. Several of them had a special relationship to the economic thinking of Marx, disciples some, critics others.
The radical reappraisal of positivism as a major movement in philosophy, science and culture aims to determine its influence on, among others, the economic sciences. 

Twenty-five years ago CEU Press started off with real time analysis of East European economic transition by most competent experts and actors of the issue: Balcerowicz, Rostowski, Frydman. Subsequent volumes discussed specific aspects of transition: 

Among economic history titles 20th c. Russian agriculture constitutes a special cluster: 

Further economic history titles discuss the intersection of globalization and the dynamics of core-periphery relations, the economic annihilation of the Jews in Hungary in the 1940s, and the impact of the Czechoslovak and East German uranium industries particularly after the end of the World War II.