Catching up, forging ahead or falling behind? Central and Eastern European development in 1990–2005

The presented study analyzes the specific features of economic cooperation of Russia and China with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). In recent years, China has begun to actively cooperate with the former socialist republics of Central and Eastern Europe, offering them new institutional projects, such as the Belt and Road and 16+1 initiatives. At the same time, the CEE region has been distancing itself from Russia — it's once main economic partner — for a number of political reasons. Russia needs to maintain its standing in the region of its traditional external interests. This makes the analysis of the specific features of China and Russia's strategies for cooperation with the CEE countries relevant and practical. Aim . The study aims to analyze the specific features of economic cooperation of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Russia with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, assess the efficiency of their cooperation, and examine the existing problems. Tasks . The authors determine historical and strategic prerequisites for the development of Russia and China's cooperation with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe; examine the institutional framework of interaction between the countries under study; assess the dynamics of changes in the volume and structure of Russia and China's trade with the CEE countries; analyze the dynamics, priority sectors, and regional structure of direct Chinese investment in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe; assess the problems in Russia and China's cooperation with the CEE countries and prospects for further development of their interaction. Methods . This study uses such research methods as verbal and statistical analysis, observation, synthesis, generalization, description, graphical modeling, and data classification. Results . Central and Eastern Europe currently occupies one of the leading positions in China's foreign policy. After a long period of stagnating economic cooperation, relations between China and the CEE countries have entered a new stage within the framework of established institutional formats. The 16+1 strategy has been proposed, and the CEE countries have been included in China's Belt and Road Initiative. The pattern of economic interaction between Russia and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in 2005-2018 is cyclical. Political factors have a significant impact on Russia's cooperation with the CEE. Conclusions . The lack of diverse tools for economic cooperation between Russia and Central and Eastern Europe, combined with Russia's low investment opportunities, prevents this cooperation from fulfilling its potential. Russia needs new institutional formats of interaction with the countries in this region, similar to those introduced by China.

The countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have much to gain from implementing policies that increase investment, support the development of human capital, and promote the legal, regulatory, and policy framework needed for market mechanisms to function. The faster they implement such changes, the faster they will bridge the income gap between them and the countries of the European Union - and the more likely their chances of successful integration. Joining the European Union (EU) is perhaps the key political and economic objective of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries as they approach the 21st century. But how successful the CEE countries are in achieving this goal depends not only on how well and quickly they adapt their legal and regulatory systems to EU requirements but on how well and quickly they bridge the wide income gaps between CEE and EU countries. Using a model and cross-section data to develop estimates, Barbone and Zalduendo investigate how appropriate structural policies adopted before and after accession to the EU can help CEE countries bridge this income gap. They have much to gain from implementing policies that increase investment, support the development of human capital, and promote the legal, regulatory, and policy framework needed for market mechanisms to function. The faster they implement such changes, the faster they will bridge the income gap between them and the EU countries - and the more likely their accession to the EU will be successful. This paper - a product of Country Department II, Europe and Central Asia - is part of a larger effort in the department to examine issues related to accession to EU by Central and Eastern European countries. Luca Barbone may be contacted at lbarbone@worldbank.org.

BackgroundAccording to the conventional point of view, compulsory health insurance (CHI) models in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries are classified as Social Health Insurance (SHI) schemes. However, the absolute dominance of the state in their regulation in many CEE countries calls into question such a qualification. The existing approaches to the definition of SHI are insufficient to clearly distinguish existing CHI models from government health financing schemes as well as to identify their exact similarities and differences with SHI models in Western Europe (WE).MethodsThe new conceptual framework is used to compare the similarities and differences between the SHI models in CEE and WE countries. The characteristics of financial flows regulation are considered to distinguish SHI from government healthcare financing schemes. Different CHI models are compared by using three different types of regulation (state, societal, market) of the three main functions of health financing system (collection, pooling, purchasing), and by types of financing agents. A qualitative, cross-country analysis is implemented with use the data from the WHO Health system reviews Health Systems in Transition.ResultsIn almost all countries considered, state regulation is dominant in the implementation of collection and pooling functions. A variety of combinations of state, societal, and market regulation is observed in the purchasing of medical services. State regulation dominates in most CEE countries, societal regulation dominates in some of them and in almost all WE countries. In most CEE countries and in some WE countries state regulation of purchasing is complemented by market regulation. Based on these characteristics, four types of SHI models are identified (State, Etatist, Bismarckian, and Quasi-Market).ConclusionThe dominance of state regulation in the CHI models in almost all CEE countries is not a sufficient reason to qualify these models as hybrid financing systems. They retain fundamental differences from government financing schemes: the systems of financial flows are separated from state budgets and operate according to the rules set specifically for these systems.

Objectives: This paper summarises the findings of a report by Acedański et al. (2023) that focuses on the relationship between science and economic growth. The report was commissioned by the Conference of Rectors of Economic Universities (KRUE) and prepared by researchers from five public economic universities in Poland. The authors of the report and the KRUE aim to share their message with a wide audience that includes policymakers, academic experts, and students. Additionally, the article analyses the impact of research and higher education spending on convergence processes in Central and Eastern European countries. Research Design & Methods: The study examined different indicators, including government expenditure on basic research, higher education, and research and development. We utilised SURE models and observed that there was notable diversity in the convergence processes among the analysed countries. Additionally, we found a correlation between research spending and the rate of catching up. However, it is important to note that this relationship is not universal and varies across countries, even those within the same region. Findings: Acedański et al. (2023) report quantifies the relationship between science, higher education, GDP, and economic development in Poland. The report states that science and higher education sectors positively impact local economies, and individuals with higher education contribute the most to human capital resources in the economy, leading to GDP growth. However, Poland has a funding gap in research and science compared to highly developed countries as well as many Central and Eastern European countries. The report suggests that investment in a country’s education and higher education system is essential for generating developmental impulses and supporting its economy. Implications / Recommendations: The impact of scientific activity depends heavily on funding, especially through higher education institutions. In Poland, the salaries of academic teachers have decreased compared to other professions, and their position in the wage distribution is the worst it has been in the past two decades. Investing in a country’s education and higher education system is essential to support the economy. Acedański et al. (2023) suggest that a 0.1 percentage point increase in research and development expenditure, as a percentage of GDP, can lead to a 0.8 to 1.3 percentage point increase in GDP growth. However, the conclusion was based on panel data from EU countries, and the impact of scientific research on GDP may differ when analysing Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. In this paper, we also present an extended analysis of the impact of science and education on economic growth through the lens of convergence processes. We show that the relationship above is not straightforward and represents substantial variability across countries, even those of the same region. Contribution / Value Added: Firstly, the report by Acedański et al. (2023) emphasises the importance of the science and higher education sector for economic growth. Their empirical research helps quantify the relationship between science, higher education, GDP, and economic development, offering a deeper understanding of this connection. The report complements previously published analyses and research on the topic. Secondly, our regional research shows that the convergence processes vary greatly among the analysed countries. The inclusion of spending on science, research, or higher education in the convergence equations has a varied impact on the assessment of the pace of the catching-up processes in the CEE region.

Several Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries require cost-utility analyses (CUAs) to support reimbursement formulary listing. However, CUAs informed by local evidence are often unavailable, and the cost-effectiveness of the several currently reimbursed biologicals is unclear. To estimate the cost-effectiveness as multiples of per capita GDP/quality adjusted life years (QALY) of four biologicals (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab) currently reimbursed in six CEE countries in six inflammatory rheumatoid and bowel disease conditions. Systematic literature review of published cost-utility analyses in the selected conditions, using the United Kingdom (UK) as reference country and with study selection criteria set to optimize the transfer of results to the CEEs. Prices in each CEE country were pro-rated against UK prices using purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted per capita GDP, and local GDP per capita/QALY ratios estimated. Central and Eastern European countries list prices were 144-333% higher than pro rata prices. Out of 85 CUAs identified by previous systematic literature reviews, 15 were selected as a convenience sample for estimating the cost-effectiveness of biologicals in the CEE countries in terms of per capita GDP/QALY. Per capita GDP/QALY values varied from 0.42 to 6.4 across countries and conditions (Bulgaria: 0.97-6.38; Czech Republic: 0.42-2.76; Hungary: 0.54-3.54; Poland: 0.59-3.90; Romania: 0.77-5.07; Slovakia: 0.55-3.61). While results must be interpreted with caution, calculating pro rata (cost-effective) prices and per capita GDP/QALY ratios based on CUAs can aid reimbursement decision-making in the absence of analyses using local data.

IntroductionMeaningful patient involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) is essential in ensuring that the interests of the affected patient population, their families, and the general public are accurately reflected in coverage and reimbursement decisions. Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries are generally at less advanced stages of implementing HTA, which is particularly true for patient involvement activities. As part of the Horizon2020 HTx project, this research aimed to form recommendations for critical barriers to patient involvement in HTA in CEE countries.MethodsBuilt on previous research findings on potential barriers, a prioritisation survey was conducted online with CEE stakeholders. Recommendations for prioritised barriers were formed through a face-to-face workshop by CEE stakeholders and HTx experts.ResultsA total of 105 stakeholders from 13 CEE countries completed the prioritisation survey and identified 12 of the 22 potential barriers as highly important. The workshop had 36 participants representing 9 CEE countries, and 5 Western European countries coming together to discuss solutions in order to form recommendations based on best practices, real-life experience, and transferability aspects. Stakeholder groups involved in both phases included HTA organisation representatives, payers, patients, caregivers, patient organisation representatives, patient experts, health care providers, academic and non-academic researchers, health care consultants and health technology manufacturers/providers. As a result, 12 recommendations were formed specified to the CEE region’s context, but potentially useful for a broader geographic audience.ConclusionIn this paper, we present 12 recommendations for meaningful, systematic, and sustainable patient involvement in HTA in CEE countries. Our hope is that engaging more than a hundred CEE stakeholders in the study helped to spread awareness of the importance and potential of patient involvement and that the resulting recommendations provide tangible steps for the way forward. Future studies shall focus on country-specific case studies of the implemented recommendations.

Purpose This paper aims to investigate theoretically and empirically the interactions between smart economic development (SED) and competitiveness in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. The main argument to uphold here is that smartness approach has been traditionally more focused on smart urban planning and smart specialization. Design/methodology/approach An evaluation by index, correlation and significance analysis is used to present original empirical evidence from six CEE countries. Findings Smartness approach integration into economic development justifies the identification of SED determinants: basics (welfare, digitality, environmental, social responsibility) and enhancers (learning, networking, agility, innovations and knowledge-driven). The interaction between SED and countries’ competitiveness in CEE countries might be described by two approaches, namely, focus-based (several most important basics and enhancers) and balance-based (equal importance of basics and enhancers). Research limitations/implications The limitations relate to the particular sample of CEE countries and gathering opportunities of statistical data. Practical implications The combination of SED-Index sub-indices and WEF GCI might aid a more accurate ex ante measurement. Despite common global challenges, each country should choose its own combinations for smartness determinants to achieve long-term competitiveness. Social implications The findings are important for fostering smartness approach in economic development for long-term competitiveness. Originality/value This paper contributes to economic development literature by discovering basics and enhancers for SED. By linking well-known term of competitiveness and economic development with a concept of smartness, the new approaches, namely, focus-based and balance-based, to policy making in CEE countries emerged.

The aim of the paper is to provide empirical evidence in support of the relationship between renewable energy consumption and economic growth in eleven Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries over the period 1995-2015 within a multivariate panel data analysis. Based on World Bank data, the panel cointegration analysis reveals that renewable energy consumption and economic growth are positively associated in the long run in CEE countries. The heterogeneous panel causality test indicates a bi-directional causality relationship in support of the feedback hypothesis between economic growth and renewable energy consumption in Central and Eastern European countries.

Eight Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries joined the European Union in 2004, and three later joined, aiming to align with the EU's average economic development. The main objective of this study is to assess the economic development status of CEE countries compared with the EU average and forecast their convergence by 2027. The study uses time-series analysis, normality tests, and convergence indices to determine the level of convergence achieved by CEE countries and various extrapolation methods to assess the level of convergence expected shortly. The results are ambivalent; in 2022, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia exceeded the EU average, while Croatia and Bulgaria lagged significantly behind. This study supports the neoclassical transition path theory, noting that in 2004, even less developed countries achieved the most dynamic growth by 2022. Despite the strong GDP correlation between EU and CEE countries, the drivers of GDP growth remain different. According to forecasting methods, Estonia will be next to reach an economic development level above the EU average. According to the results of extrapolation methods, Estonia may be followed by Poland, Romania and Slovakia in catching up with the EU.

PurposeThe authors’ aim is to establish the variance of youth welfare citizenship regimes in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and to revisit the applicability of the regime approach to the emerging welfare regimes (EWRs).Design/methodology/approachThe empirical analysis follows the descriptive case study strategy aiming to discover diversity of youth welfare citizenship patterns. The case selection is made within the CEE country group, which includes countries in Central Europe, the Baltics, Eastern Europe and Southeast Europe, all sharing the communist past. The subdivision of these countries in reference to the welfare states can be made via the European Union (EU) membership based on the assumption that EU social policy frameworks and recommendations have an important effect on domestic policies. We included countries which are in the EU, i.e., with a similar political and economic transition path. There were three waves of accession to the EU in CEE countries. In the first wave (2004), all the Baltic countries, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Slovenia joined. In the second wave (2007), Romania and Bulgaria joined. Finally, Croatia joined the EU in 2013. Altogether 11 CEE countries are the EU members today, the remaining CEE countries are non-EU members and thus are excluded from the current research. Those countries which are part of the EU share similarities in social and economic reforms during the pre-accession period and after in order to reach a comparatively similar system with other member states. So, in terms of casing strategy these six countries can be named as emerging welfare regimes (EWRs) evolving transformations across different public policy areas. Handpicking of six countries out of 11 relies on the assumption that the Anglo-Saxon welfare system characteristics are more evident in the Baltic countries (Aidukaite, 2019; Aidukaite et al., 2020; Ainsaar et al., 2020; Rajevska and Rajevska, 2020) and Slovenia, while in Bulgaria and Croatia certain outcomes reflect the Bismarckian principles of social security (Hrast and Rakar, 2020; Stoilova and Krasteva, 2020; Dobrotić, 2020). This brings important variety into our analysis logic. Last but not least, we juxtapose six CEE EWR countries under analysis with six mature welfare regime countries representing different welfare regime types. Those mature welfare regime countries (Finland, Sweden, France, Germany, Italy, UK) are not an explicit object of the study but help to put analysed CEE EWR cases into larger context and thus, reflect upon theoretical claims of the welfare regime literature.FindingsThe authors can confirm that the EWR countries can be rather well explained by the welfare citizenship typology and complement the existing knowledge on youth welfare regime typology clusters in the Western Europe. Estonia is clustered close to the Nordic countries, whereas Latvia, Lithuania, Croatia and Slovenia are close to the Bismarckian welfare model despite rather flexible, non-restricted educational path, universal child and student support. Bulgaria is an outlier; however, it is clustered together with mature Mediterranean welfare regimes. Former intact welfare regime clusters are becoming more diverse. The authors’ findings confirm that there is no any intact cluster of the “post-communist” welfare regime and Eastern European countries are today “on move”.Research limitations/implicationsAltogether 11 CEE countries are the EU members today. The remaining CEE countries are non-EU members and thus are excluded from the current research. Those countries which are part of the EU share similarities in social and economic reforms during the pre-accession period and after in order to reach a comparatively similar system with other member states. At least one CEE country was chosen based on existing theoretical knowledge on the welfare regime typology (Anglo Saxon, Beveridgean, Bismarckian) for the Post-communist country groups.Practical implicationsIn the social citizenship dimension we dropped social assistance schemes and tax-relief indices and included poverty risk and housing measures. Youth poverty together with housing showed rather clear distinction between familialized and individualised countries and thus, made the typology stronger. In the economic dimension the preliminary picture was much fuzzier, mainly due to the comprehensive education in the region and intervention of the EU in domestic ALMPs (and VET) reforms. The authors added a new indicator (pro-youth orientation of ALMP) in order better to capture youth-sensitivity of policy.Social implicationsThe authors included a working poverty measure (in-work poverty rate) in order to reflect labour market insecurity as an increasing concern. Yet, the analysis results were still mixed and new indicators did not help locating the regime types.Originality/valueIn order to improve the validity of the youth welfare citizenship regime economic dimension, Chevalier's (2020) model may also be worth revisiting. The authors argue that this dichotomy is not sufficient, because inclusive type can have orientation towards general skills or occupational skills (i.e. monitored or enabling citizenship clusters), which is currently ignored. Chevalier (2020) furthermore associates inclusive economic citizenship with “coordinated market economies” (referring to Hall and Soskice, 2001), which seems hardly hold validity in the Nordic and at least some CEE countries.

Before the transition the principal development objective for the animal production sector in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries was the attainment of national self-sufficiency, and, is some countries, export orientation. Increasing production costs and the low productivity were compensated through subsides. During the first years of transition, the number of animals declined from 20 to 80 percent, due to the drastic reduction of demand (elimination of subsides and family revenue decrease), disruption of traditional markets, rise of the cost of production. The establishment of a large number of small private farms have led to the creation of specific production systems in a number of countries. Countries which have retained large production units are confronted with needs to update technology in accordance with new requirements (market, environment). Following the request of made by CEE countries, EAAP has established a Task Force on CEE countries. The Task Force has organised seven meetings (round tables, workshops and seminars) in the period 1991-96. Some experts from CEE and Western Europe participated at these events. Over 1400 pages of studies and proceedings have been published. The Task Force has completed its tasks in 1996, when a Contact Group on CEE countries has been established to identify the major policy issues influencing animal production in CEE, to prepare and organise meetings to address these policy questions, and to promote an increase in effectiveness of linkages between CEE and Western European countries.

To control for the endogeneity problem, this study applies the two-stage least squares technique to examine the impact of bank and stock market development on economic growth in the thirteen Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries in the European Union (EU) during 2001–2020. The first hypothesis states that the higher bank development has not contributed to higher growth in the CEE countries. The overall results only support the hypothesis for the subperiod of 2001–2009. The second hypothesis states that the higher stock market development has not spurred growth in the CEE countries. The overall results support the hypothesis over the entire period of 2001–2020. Finally, despite the CEE integration with the EU developed countries for the past decades, there is a very limited number of empirical studies on the finance–growth relationship in the CEE countries. This study contributes to the relevant literature by examining the bank and stock market development’s relationship with growth in the CEE developing countries.

Introduction: Climate change and the limiting nature of fossil natural resources are compelling elements that have driven the search for environmentally friendly alternatives to the traditional economy. In this context, as the main pillar of bioeconomy, biomass can contribute to energy sustainability, temper effects of climate change, and make the use of natural resources more efficiently. Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries have a relatively common economic history of agriculture playing a pivotal role in the former centralized economy. Purpose: This chapter analyzed the importance of biomass produced from residues of crops in CEE countries. This analysis is regarded as incentive to take a deeper look at biomass in CEE countries with acknowledged agricultural potential. CEE countries have been part of the former European socialist bloc, with agriculture being a core component of the centralized economy. Even though their economies have been undergoing a lengthy transition process to the market economy, this sector of activity still holds a significant share. Therefore, CEE countries provide a suitable ground for our analysis. Methodology: The authors selected characteristics of the agricultural sectors and development, and assess their relationship with biomass production in the CEE countries, using an Ordinary Least Squares method. Then, the authors investigate the environmental implications of crop biomass production in a similar framework. Findings: The results reveal that the agricultural biomass sector contributes to economic development, and it does not have negative implications for environmental indicators. These results show that biomass production is a sustainable target to be pursued.

This chapter focuses on Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries and the relationship between their economic performance and air transport markets. In 2004, all seven investigated Central and Eastern European countries, together with Slovenia, Malta, and Cyprus, joined the European Union and entered the single aviation market. However, compared with the developed economies of Western European regions, Central and Eastern European countries still lag behind them in terms of the level of GDP per capita. The transformation of CEE economies from centrally managed to market-driven, initiated at the end of the 20th century, led to gradual changes in air transport markets at the beginning of this process. Air transport liberalisation accelerated the transformation and integration processes of CEE countries, not only in the field of air transport markets, but also through the development of whole economies. The relationships between economic development and the air transport market have been the subject of many studies.

Use of biologics for psoriasis in Central and Eastern European countries.