The Transformation of the Romanian Economy Through Privatization and Internationalization (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Mass Privatization Process in Romania: A Case of Failed Anglo-Saxon Capitalism
The examination of property rights transformation in transition countries is highly consequential for claims about the variety of capitalism. The mass privatization process can help to move speedily towards an Anglo-Saxon system in which private property is widely dispersed. This distinctive privatization strategy, which was implemented in most East-Central transition countries, is examined in this paper from an institutional perspective. Using a case-by-case approach to the institutional and legal arrangements of the Romanian privatization, the present study finds that in Romania the mass privatization program failed to emulate the main features of a functioning Anglo-Saxon capitalist model, given the complicated institutional set up and the unwillingness of government to abdicate economic control. It determined a special form of post-socialist capitalism, in which political clientelism plays a major role.
International business and institutional development in Central and Eastern Europe
Journal of International Management, 2008
Since the early 1990s, Central and Eastern Europe has attracted international business research into the interaction between radical societal change and business development in these emerging market economies. This research has effectively utilized institutional theories, and thus revealed limitations of similar applications in other contexts, while setting the stage for more refined argumentations, especially with respect to rapidly changing contexts. This introductory paper outlines both economic and the sociological perspectives on the influence of institutions on business, and thus sets the stage for this Special Issue. On this basis, we introduce the five papers in this special issue, and outline an agenda for future research.
International Journal of Management and Economics, 2018
A growing literature examines institutional arrangements in Central and Eastern European (CEE) market economies. Some sources claim that there is a distinct model of capitalism in this region. This paper overviews and analyzes the results of these studies in connection with crucial methodological issues showing the limitations of institutional analysis. Despite all methodological difficulties, with a combination of different methods, institutional comparison is able to provide essential insights into the position and future prospects of CEE member states. One of the most important insights is that the maintenance of economic convergence to Western European countries requires substantial institutional changes. This paper also suggests that a broader historical context can help to evaluate opportunities and the risk of path dependency. It seems fruitful if the current development is fit into the conceptual framework which conceives of CEE as the region of "in-betweenness," where the legacy of incomplete modernization attempts hinders the optimal institutional arrangement.
Privatization in an Adverse Institutional Context: The Case of Kosovo
Regarding the effectiveness of privatization, two schools of thought are distinguished: a school in favor of privatization in general and a school that judges the success of privatization to be dependent on the institutional context. This article discusses the arguments of both schools and presents a case study on the privatization processes that did take place in Kosovo. The Kosovo case is a critical case as Kosovo was a post-conflict country with a deplorable institutional setting at the time it initiated the privatization processes. If privatization was successful anyway, this would make for a strong argument in favor of privatization in general.
The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 2006
College of Charleston. FRANK HEFNER is an associate professor of economics at the College of Charleston. MARIUS DAN is a graduate student in finance at the University of Wyoming. The authors would like to thank the support from the Jessie Ball du Pont research grant. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2003 Austrian Scholars Conference. 1 Rothbard (1992) has provided insight into an Austrian perspective on these issues. 2 Hefner and Woodward (1999) discuss the role of foreign direct investment in developing entrepreneurial activity and successful business practices in Romania. Coyne and Leeson (2004) more recently discuss the role of three types of entrepreneurship, productive, unproductive, and evasive, in underdeveloped countries using Romania as a case study.