政治经济体制大规模转型的速度

IF 0.3 Q4 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Ružica Šimić Banović, Martina Basarac Sertić, V. Vučković
{"title":"政治经济体制大规模转型的速度","authors":"Ružica Šimić Banović, Martina Basarac Sertić, V. Vučković","doi":"10.31297/HKJU.18.4.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article compares the applicability of both the gradual and the shock therapy approach to reform implementation in large-scale change. Using quantitative data, it aims to provide more evidence for the lessons learned from post-socialist transformation. Hence it adds a theoretical and an empirical contribution to the body of literature on great transformations, focusing on their speed and the\nacceptability of related policy solutions. Despite the predominant inclination towards the gradualist approach to reforms in the initial transition years, economic indicators suggest that the big\nbang reformers have demonstrated a superior performance over the last (few) decade(s). Still, the approach to (post-)transition processes should be multidimensional and include more than the speed of transformation and key economic indicators. Therefore, a quantitative analysis covers several aspects of socioeconomic change. The analysis of the quality of democracy, market economy, and management performance in post-socialist EU member states indicates that over\nthe last decade the countries that applied the shock therapy approach have performed significantly better in all these areas. This suggests that slow reformers are lagging behind in the development of democratic institutions and a modern market economy, and presumably have insufficient capacities to rapidly catch up with fast reformers.\nFurther research on this topic should tackle the deep roots of socioeconomic development and path-dependent choices (reform speed included), proximity to Western countries, the possible effects of other specific circumstances (such as war), the importance of selected institutions on the performance of post-socialist non-EU member states, and other limitations.","PeriodicalId":42223,"journal":{"name":"Croatian and Comparative Public Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Speed of Large-Scale Transformation of Political and Economic Institutions\",\"authors\":\"Ružica Šimić Banović, Martina Basarac Sertić, V. Vučković\",\"doi\":\"10.31297/HKJU.18.4.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article compares the applicability of both the gradual and the shock therapy approach to reform implementation in large-scale change. Using quantitative data, it aims to provide more evidence for the lessons learned from post-socialist transformation. Hence it adds a theoretical and an empirical contribution to the body of literature on great transformations, focusing on their speed and the\\nacceptability of related policy solutions. Despite the predominant inclination towards the gradualist approach to reforms in the initial transition years, economic indicators suggest that the big\\nbang reformers have demonstrated a superior performance over the last (few) decade(s). Still, the approach to (post-)transition processes should be multidimensional and include more than the speed of transformation and key economic indicators. Therefore, a quantitative analysis covers several aspects of socioeconomic change. The analysis of the quality of democracy, market economy, and management performance in post-socialist EU member states indicates that over\\nthe last decade the countries that applied the shock therapy approach have performed significantly better in all these areas. This suggests that slow reformers are lagging behind in the development of democratic institutions and a modern market economy, and presumably have insufficient capacities to rapidly catch up with fast reformers.\\nFurther research on this topic should tackle the deep roots of socioeconomic development and path-dependent choices (reform speed included), proximity to Western countries, the possible effects of other specific circumstances (such as war), the importance of selected institutions on the performance of post-socialist non-EU member states, and other limitations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Croatian and Comparative Public Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Croatian and Comparative Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31297/HKJU.18.4.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Croatian and Comparative Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31297/HKJU.18.4.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文比较了渐进疗法和休克疗法在大规模变革中改革实施的适用性。利用定量数据,它旨在为从后社会主义转型中吸取的教训提供更多证据。因此,它为关于伟大变革的文献增添了理论和实证贡献,重点关注变革的速度和相关政策解决方案的可接受性。尽管在最初的过渡年里,改革主要倾向于渐进式,但经济指标表明,大变革派在过去(几十年)里表现出了卓越的表现。尽管如此,(后)过渡进程的方法应该是多层面的,不仅包括转型速度和关键经济指标。因此,定量分析涵盖了社会经济变化的几个方面。对后社会主义欧盟成员国的民主质量、市场经济和管理绩效的分析表明,在过去十年中,采用休克疗法的国家在所有这些领域的表现都要好得多。这表明,缓慢的改革者在民主制度和现代市场经济的发展方面落后,可能没有足够的能力迅速赶上快速的改革者。对这一主题的进一步研究应解决社会经济发展和路径依赖性选择(包括改革速度)的深层根源、与西方国家的接近、其他特定情况(如战争)的可能影响、选定机构对后社会主义非欧盟成员国表现的重要性以及其他局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Speed of Large-Scale Transformation of Political and Economic Institutions
This article compares the applicability of both the gradual and the shock therapy approach to reform implementation in large-scale change. Using quantitative data, it aims to provide more evidence for the lessons learned from post-socialist transformation. Hence it adds a theoretical and an empirical contribution to the body of literature on great transformations, focusing on their speed and the acceptability of related policy solutions. Despite the predominant inclination towards the gradualist approach to reforms in the initial transition years, economic indicators suggest that the big bang reformers have demonstrated a superior performance over the last (few) decade(s). Still, the approach to (post-)transition processes should be multidimensional and include more than the speed of transformation and key economic indicators. Therefore, a quantitative analysis covers several aspects of socioeconomic change. The analysis of the quality of democracy, market economy, and management performance in post-socialist EU member states indicates that over the last decade the countries that applied the shock therapy approach have performed significantly better in all these areas. This suggests that slow reformers are lagging behind in the development of democratic institutions and a modern market economy, and presumably have insufficient capacities to rapidly catch up with fast reformers. Further research on this topic should tackle the deep roots of socioeconomic development and path-dependent choices (reform speed included), proximity to Western countries, the possible effects of other specific circumstances (such as war), the importance of selected institutions on the performance of post-socialist non-EU member states, and other limitations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信