Politická ekonomie 2008, 56(6):819-836 | DOI: 10.18267/j.polek.665

Prečo sú niektoré sektory v tranzitívnych ekonomikách menej reformované ako ostatné? prípad výskumu a vzdelávania v oblasti ekonómie

Pavel Ciaian, Ján Pokrivčák, Dušan Drabik
1 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, LICOS Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance a Slovenská poľnohospodárska univerzita v Nitre, Fakulta ekonomiky a manažmentu.
2 Slovenská poľnohospodárska univerzita v Nitre, Fakulta ekonomiky a manažmentu.

Why some sectors of transition economies are less reformed than others? the case of economic research and education

In the paper we analyze economic university research and education in transition countries. University system differs from industry in the nature of output that it produces. University system is engaged in production of public goods rather than private goods. The sector also suffers from the measurement problem of quality of its output. We argue that because of these factors reforms were slower in this sector leading to low productivity growth. Pressure groups succeeded in gaining significant control inside administrative structures regulating the sector. By creating the accreditation commission the state decreases the communication cost of pressure groups making lobbing activity cheaper. A case study from the Czech Republic and Slovakia shows that the accreditation commission which is composed from representatives of state universities and established research institutes succeeded in maintaining their dominant position and set evaluation criteria fitting their interests. This institutional setting led to low university research productivity. The results also show that in Slovakia economic research is still predominantly carried out by central research institutes and universities are engaged mainly in teaching.

Keywords: productivity, transition, economic research, economic education, public good, reform
JEL classification: H11, I28, P21, P5

Published: December 1, 2008  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Ciaian, P., Pokrivčák, J., & Drabik, D. (2008). Why some sectors of transition economies are less reformed than others? the case of economic research and education. Politická ekonomie56(6), 819-836. doi: 10.18267/j.polek.665
Download citation

References

  1. AKERLOF, G. A. 1970. The market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1970, vol. 84, no. 3, s. 488500. Go to original source...
  2. ACEMOGLU, D.; VERDIER, T. 2000. The Choice Between Market Failure and Corruption. American Economic Review. 2000, vol. 90, no. 1, s. 194211. Go to original source...
  3. ANDREONI, J. 1988. Privately Provided Public Goods in a Large Economy: The Limits of Altruism. Journal of Public Economic.1988, vol. 35, no.1, s. 5773. Go to original source...
  4. ARROW, K. J. 1963. Uncertainty and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care. American Economic Review. 1963, vol. 53, no. 5, s. 941973.
  5. BALAZS, K.; FAULKNER, W.; SCHIMANK, U. 1995. Transformation of the Research Systems of Post-Communist Central and Eastern Europe: An Introduction. Social Studies of Science, 1995, vol. 25, no. 4, s. 613-632. Go to original source...
  6. BERG, A.; BORENSZTEIN, E.; SAHAY, R.; ZETTELMEYER, J. 1999. The Evolution of Output in Transition Economies: Explaining the Differences [Working Paper 99/73]. International Monetary Fund (IMF). Washington, D. C., 1999. www.imf.org.
  7. CIAIAN, P.; POKRIVCAK, J.; RAJCANIOVA, M. 2005. The State of Economic Research in Slovakia. Finance a Úvěr Czech Journal of Economics and Finance. 2005, vol. 55, no. 11-12, s. 546-562.
  8. DE MELO, M.; DENIZER, C.; GELB, A.; TENEV, S. 2001. Circumstance and Choice: The Role of Initial Conditions and Policies in Transition Economies. World Bank Economic Review. 2001, vol. 15, no. 1, s. 1-31. Go to original source...
  9. FALCETTI, E.; RAISER, M.; SANFEY, P. 2002. Defying the Odds: Initial Conditions, Reforms, and Growth in the First Decade of Transition. Journal of Comparative Economics. 2002, vol. 30, no. 2, s. 229250. Go to original source...
  10. GAMER, A. C. 1979. Academic Publication, Market Signaling and Scientific Research Decisions. Economic Inquiry. 1979, vol. 17, no. 4, s. 575-585. Go to original source...
  11. GARADSTEIN, M. 1992. Time Dynamics and Incomplete Information in the Private Provision of Public Goods. Journal of Political Economy. 1992, vol. 100, no. 3, s. 581-597. Go to original source...
  12. GARADSTEIN, M. 1993. Rent Seeking and the Provision of Public Goods. Economic Journal. 1993, vol. 103, no. 402, s. 1236-1243. Go to original source...
  13. GARCIA-CASTRILLO, P.; MONTANES, A.; SANZ-GRACIA, F. 2002. A Worldwide Assessment of Scientific Production in Economics (1992-1997). Applied Economics. 2002, vol. 34, no. 12, s. 1453-1475. Go to original source...
  14. HARDIN, G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science. 1968, vol. 162, no. 3859, s. 1243-1248. Go to original source...
  15. HUME, D. 1739. A Treatise of Human Nature. Reprint. London : J. M. Dent 1952. Go to original source...
  16. JONES, C. I.; WILLIAMS, J. C. 1998. Measuring the Social Return to R&D. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1998, vol. 113, no. 4, s. 1119- 1135. Go to original source...
  17. KAMENICEK, J. 2005. Stereotypy chování v hodnocení výsledků výzkumu. Paper presented at the seminar: Problémy ekonomické vědy a vzdělávání. Prague 26. September 2005.
  18. KRAFT, E.; VODOPOVIEC, M. 2003. The New Kids on the Block: The Entry of Private Business Schools in Transition Economies. Education Economics. 2003, vol. 11, no. 3, s. 239-257. Go to original source...
  19. MACHACEK, M.; KOLCUNOVA, E. 2005. Publish or Perish? On the Importance of Publishing on the Economic Sciences Tenure-track in the Czech Republic. Finance a Úvěr Czech Journal of Economics and Finance. 2005, vol. 55, no. 11-12, s. 563-577.
  20. MOORE, J. H. 1994. Science and Technology in Central and Eastern Europe: After the Revolution. European Business Journal. 1994, vol. 6, no. 1, s. 8-20.
  21. NISKANEN, A. W. (Jr.) 1994. Bureaucracy and Public Economics. Aldershot, Hants, England, Brookfield : Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. ISBN 1858980410
  22. OLSON, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Goods, Cambridge : Harvard University Press. ISBN 0674537513
  23. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) 2000. The health care system. OECD Economic Surveys: Poland 2000, Paris: OECD.
  24. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) 2005a. Economic Survey of the Slovak Republic 2005, Paris: OECD.
  25. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) 2005b. Policies to Improve the Health Care System. OECD Economic Surveys: Hungary 2005, Paris: OECD.
  26. PLESKOVIC, B.; ANDERS, A.; BADER, W.; CAMPBELL, R. 2000. State of the Art in Economics Education and Research in Transition Economies. Comparative Economic Studies. 2000, vol. 42, s. 65-108. Go to original source...
  27. RODRIK, D. 2001. Institutions for High-Quality growth: What They are and How to Acquire Them [Working Paper no. 7540]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), 2001. www.nber.com. Go to original source...
  28. ROLAND, G. 2000. Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets, and Firms. Cambridge : MIT Press. ISBN 0262182033
  29. ROLAND, G. 2001. Ten Years After… Transition and Economics. IMF Staff Papers. 2001, vol. 48, no. 4, s. 29-52.
  30. ROMER, P. M. 1990. Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy. 1990, vol. 98, no. 5, s. 71-102. Go to original source...
  31. SACHS, J. 1992. Privatization in Russia: Some Lessons from Eastern Europe. American Economic Review. 1992, vol. 82, no. 2, s. 43-48.
  32. SPENCE, M. A. 1973. Job Market Signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1973, vol. 87, no. 3, s. 355-374. Go to original source...
  33. STIGLER, G. J. 1971. The Theory of Economic Regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics & Management Science. 1973. vol. 2, no. 1, s. 3-21. Go to original source...
  34. SWINNEN, J. F. M. 1996. Endogenous Price and Trade Policy Developments in Central European Agriculture. European Review of Agricultural Economics. 1996, vol. 23, no. 2, s. 133-160. Go to original source...
  35. TURNOVEC, F. 2005. Institutional Research Capital and Individual Performance of Economists in the CR. Finance a Úvěr Czech Journal of Economics and Finance. 2005, vol. 55, no. 11-12, s. 531-545.
  36. WEISNER, E. 1998. Transaction Cost Economics and Public Sector Rent Seeking in Developing Countries: Towards a Theory of Governance Failure. In PICCIOTTO R.; WEISNER, E. (eds.). Evaluation and Development: The Institutional Dimension, Washington, D. C. : World Bank.
  37. WIGGER, B. U.; von WEIZSACKER, K. R. 2001. Risk, Resources, and Education: Public Versus Private Financing of Higher Education. IMF Staff Papers. 2001, vol. 48, no. 3, s. 547-560.
  38. WORLD BANK. 2003. From Knowledge to Wealth: Transforming Russian Science and Technology for a Modern Knowledge Economy [World Bank Policy Research Working Paper no. WPS2974]. World Bank, Washington, D.C 2003. www.worldbank.org.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.