Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
15 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Discussion paper series 2791
While China shared many systemic, initial conditions with the transition economies of Central-East Europe (CEE) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), it had a more agricultural economy and a more stable political-economic system than many CEE and CIS countries. Unlike most of the CEE and CIS economies, China adopted a strategy of gradual economic transformation that maintained the existing system and created new economic activities on top of it. This enabled China to avoid the transformation depression observed in CEE and CIS, and allowed it to generate high rates of economic growth that have now lasted for almost three decades. At the time of this study, the CEE and CIS economies have also completed a decade or more of respectable economic growth, demonstrating that numerous forms of the transition process can generate long term economic growth. In retrospect, the tradeoff for avoiding an initial depression appears to be the willingness to maintain most of the existing economic and political system rather than embarking on a rapid but incomplete economic and political transformation. With a rising economic instability and political pressure, countries such as Poland and the Soviet Union (CIS) had little choice but to proceed relatively fast. Others, such as East Germany and Czechoslovakia, could have retained the centrally planned system, but they abandoned it and communism rapidly for political reasons. Looking forward, the current situation is an optimistic one, with China, CIS and CEE belonging to the fastest growing regions of the world. It will be interesting to see whether all or only some of these models will turn out to be successful in the long run.
In: Eastern European economics: EEE, Band 29, Heft 2, S. 5-28
ISSN: 1557-9298
In: Routledge corruption and anti-corruption studies
In: Discussion paper series 2637
"We analyze a large stratified random sample of firms that provide us with measures of performance and each firm's top manager's perception of the severity of business environment constraints faced by his/her firm. Unlike most existing studies that rely on external and aggregated proxy measures of the business environment, defined to include legal and institutional features, we have information from each surveyed firm. Specifically, we use the 2005 and 2002 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) to assess the effect on performance of ownership, competition, export orientation and the business environment of the firm. We employ a variety of approaches to deal with the problem of omitted variables, errors in variables and endogeneity that plague studies in this area. We find that foreign ownership and competition have an impact on performance -- measured as the level of sales controlling for inputs. Export orientation of the firm does not have an effect on performance once ownership is taken into account. When we analyze the impact of perceived constraints, we show that few retain explanatory power once they are introduced jointly rather than one at a time, or when country, industry and year fixed effects are introduced. Indeed, country fixed effects largely absorb the explanatory power of the constraints faced by individual firms. Replicating the analysis with commonly used country-level indicators of the business environment, we do not find much of a relationship between constraints and performance. Our analysis brings into question an important part of the conventional wisdom in this area. It indicates that country fixed effects, reflecting time-invariant differences in the business environment but also other factors, matter for firm performance, but that differences in the business environment observed across firms within countries do not. Moreover, the limited firm- and country-level variations in the business environment over time do not appear to affect performance either. This suggests that the effect of business environment on performance and the analysts' ability to identify this effect are more limited than has been assumed to date"--Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit web site
This book concentrates on Senegal's urban industrial sector, which has performed poorly despite a relatively mature base at independence, considerable investment since, and preferential trade agreements. The authors combine institutional analysis with econometric estimation to provide an understanding of the functioning of Senegal's industrial labor market and to evaluate the effects of public policy in several key areas. Of special concern are the effects of different forms of ownership of firms, the value of export-oriented development, and government regulation. Also evaluated are the impact of trade unions, organizational characteristics of firms, ethnic and skill composition of the labor force, and training and educational programs within Senegal
World Affairs Online
In: Discussion paper series 2801
Paper addresses the recent initiatives of EU Lisbon Agenda to increase level of R&D expenses in EU Member States by studying firm-level panel data in most advanced transition economy, Slovenia. Previous empirical literature mainly cross-sectional has tested the demand-pull hypothesis and found in overall that R&D expenses may be driven by output. Using a panel of over 150 Slovene firms over the 1996-2000 period, and checking for fixed effects, time, industrial and size dummies and for the path-dependent nature of R&D, we also find a significant role of sales in inducing R&D expenditures. Besides that data also confirm that internal funds and (un)successful bargaining for higher wages present significant variables for higher R&D expenses. However, at the micro level, the demand-pull, internal funds and bargaining effects play a varying role for the different sub-samples of firms. In particular, exporting firms, those which are liquidity-constrained, those not receiving public subsidies and those not heading a business group, seem to be particularly sensitive in deciding their R&D expenditures. R&D behavior at the firm level is modeled as error-correction model and estimated in system GMM specification.
In: Politická ekonomie: teorie, modelování, aplikace, Band 54, Heft 4, S. 467-489
ISSN: 2336-8225
N/A
In: Discussion paper series 3299
Globalization brings opportunities and pressures for domestic firms in emerging market economies to innovate and improve their competitive position. Using recent data on firms in 27 transition economies, we test for the effects of globalization through the impact of increased competition and foreign direct investment on domestic firms' efforts to raise their capability (innovate) by upgrading their technology or their product/service (improving quality or developing a new one), taking into account firm heterogeneity. We find support for the prediction that competition has a negative effect on innovation, especially for firms further from the frontier, and that the supply chain of multinational enterprises and international trade are important channels for domestic firm innovation. We do not find support for the inverted U effect of competition on innovation. There is partial support for the hypothesis that firms in a more pro-business environment invest more in innovation and are more likely to display the inverted U relationship between competition and innovation. -- Competition ; innovation ; emerging markets ; spillovers
In: Discussion paper series 3079
We use firm-level data and national input-output tables from 17 countries over the 2002-2005 period to test new and existing hypotheses about the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on the efficiency of domestic firms in the host country (i.e., spillovers). Providing evidence from a larger sample of countries and greater variety of firms than existing studies, with separate estimates by firm size, age, and sector, we show: a) backward spillovers (stemming from supplying a foreign firm in the host country or exporting to a foreign firm) are consistently positive; b) horizontal spillovers are mostly insignificant but positive for older firms and firms in the service sector; d) forward spillovers (from purchasing from foreign firms or importing) are also positive only for old and service sector firms. We find no support for the hypothesis that spillovers are greater for FDI with more advanced technology. While efficiency of domestic firms' is affected by the business environment, the strength of FDI spillovers is not, either when measured by the degree of corruption, bureaucratic red tape or by differences across regions that vary in terms of development. Testing whether spillovers vary with the firm's "absorptive capacity" we find: i) distance from the efficiency frontier tends to dampen horizontal spillovers in manufacturing and backward spillovers among old firms; ii) whereas firms with a larger share of university educated workforce are more productive, they do not enjoy greater FDI spillovers than firms with less educated workers. FDI spillovers hence vary by sectors and types of firms. -- FDI ; spillovers ; transition economies ; efficiency
Using a new survey, we show that the dispersion of marginal products across firms in the European Union is about twice as large as that in the United States. Reducing it to the US level would increase EU GDP by more than 30 percent. Alternatively, removing barriers between industries and countries would raise EU GDP by at least 25 percent. Firm characteristics, such as demographics, quality of inputs, utilization of resources, and dynamic adjustment of inputs, are predictors of the marginal products of capital and labor. We emphasize that some firm characteristics may reflect compensating differentials rather than constraints and the effect of constraints on the dispersion of marginal products may hence be smaller than has been assumed in the literature. We also show that cross-country differences in the dispersion of marginal products are more due to differences in how the business, institutional and policy environment translates firm characteristics into outcomes than to the differences in firm characteristics per se.
BASE
World Affairs Online