How Not to Get Stuck in the Middle Lessons for the Commonwealth of Independent States from Central and Eastern Europe

Kamil Pruchnik, J. Zowczak
{"title":"How Not to Get Stuck in the Middle Lessons for the Commonwealth of Independent States from Central and Eastern Europe","authors":"Kamil Pruchnik, J. Zowczak","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3065968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to analyze how different models of transformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) increased or decreased the risk of being stuck in the middle-income trap (MIT). The key finding is that the CEE and CIS countries are, from a definition point of view, not materially at risk of the MIT as out of nine selected MIT definitions, none of the CEE or CIS countries were “stuck” more than three times. At the same time, the CEE countries are more at risk of falling into the MIT than the CIS countries; however this is because the CIS is a poorer region and is not near the lower MIT thresholds. The CEE countries had a better start at the beginning of the transformation and on average implemented a better set of transformation models; however, some CEE countries are now struggling to permanently join the advanced countries and CIS countries are, on average, far behind that. The literature review on transformation models and the analysis of the “jumps” in the World Bank ranking classification suggest that while the MIT is not a concern for CEE or CIS countries, in order to speed up convergence, CIS countries might consider more shocks and consistently following free market related approaches. The study fills a gap in the literature on the MIT which has thoroughly analyzed the Asian and Latin American countries but has provided little analysis of the CEE and CIS countries.","PeriodicalId":175661,"journal":{"name":"CASE - Center for Social & Economic Research Paper Series","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CASE - Center for Social & Economic Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3065968","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze how different models of transformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) increased or decreased the risk of being stuck in the middle-income trap (MIT). The key finding is that the CEE and CIS countries are, from a definition point of view, not materially at risk of the MIT as out of nine selected MIT definitions, none of the CEE or CIS countries were “stuck” more than three times. At the same time, the CEE countries are more at risk of falling into the MIT than the CIS countries; however this is because the CIS is a poorer region and is not near the lower MIT thresholds. The CEE countries had a better start at the beginning of the transformation and on average implemented a better set of transformation models; however, some CEE countries are now struggling to permanently join the advanced countries and CIS countries are, on average, far behind that. The literature review on transformation models and the analysis of the “jumps” in the World Bank ranking classification suggest that while the MIT is not a concern for CEE or CIS countries, in order to speed up convergence, CIS countries might consider more shocks and consistently following free market related approaches. The study fills a gap in the literature on the MIT which has thoroughly analyzed the Asian and Latin American countries but has provided little analysis of the CEE and CIS countries.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中东欧独联体国家如何不陷入中学困境
本文的目的是分析中欧和东欧(CEE)和独立国家联合体(CIS)的不同转型模式如何增加或减少陷入中等收入陷阱(MIT)的风险。关键的发现是,从定义的角度来看,中东欧和独联体国家没有重大的麻省理工学院风险,因为在九个选定的麻省理工学院定义中,没有一个中东欧或独联体国家被“卡住”超过三次。与此同时,中东欧国家比独联体国家更有可能陷入麻省理工学院;然而,这是因为独联体是一个较贫穷的地区,没有接近较低的麻省理工阈值。中东欧国家在转型初期起步较好,总体上实施的转型模式较好;然而,一些中东欧国家目前正在努力永久加入发达国家的行列,而独联体国家平均远远落后于此。对转型模型的文献回顾和对世界银行排名分类中的“跳跃”的分析表明,虽然麻省理工学院不是中东欧或独联体国家所关注的问题,但为了加快趋同,独联体国家可能会考虑更多的冲击,并始终遵循与自由市场相关的方法。该研究填补了麻省理工学院文献的空白,该文献对亚洲和拉丁美洲国家进行了全面分析,但对中东欧和独联体国家的分析很少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Informal Employment and Wages in Poland Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2020 Final Report Increasing the International Role of the Euro: A Long Way to Go Financing for the Polish Economy: Prospects and Threats (Finansowanie polskiej gospodarki: perspektywy i zagrożenia) Economic Recovery and Inflation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1