Abstract
The paper deals with analysis of the mechanism of macroeconomic imbalance estimation and achieving the convergence of national economy. With this purpose the authors summarized the main approaches to define the macroeconomic imbalance. In addition, the main indicators which influence macroeconomic imbalance are allocated. On the basis of obtained results, the authors offer to employ the macroeconomic imbalance procedure which is used in EU countries for investigation. In order to achieve this external, internal and employment indicators in EU were analyzed by authors. Besides, with the purpose to indicate Ukrainian place comparing with EU, in particular with Visegrad Countries, the main indicators of MIP for Ukraine were calculated by the authors. According to the results, the authors made conclusion that the Ukrainian economy can be characterized as not stable (as in Bulgaria, Hungary and the Slovak Republic). Moreover, the authors allocated for the future research the necessity to understand the power of countries impact to each other with the purpose to achieve and save the convergence of national economy.
Highlights
The current situation in Ukraine can be characterized as unstable
The huge number of problems in the economic, political, ecological, social and other spheres restrain the Ukrainian development and as a consequence it will be impossible to achieve the convergence of the national economy
Ukraine couldn’t recover after the financial crisis (2008–2009) which allocated the problem of estimation the macroeconomic imbalances, and in particular private debts and divergences in price and cost competitiveness
Summary
The current situation in Ukraine can be characterized as unstable. The huge number of problems in the economic, political, ecological, social and other spheres restrain the Ukrainian development and as a consequence it will be impossible to achieve the convergence of the national economy. The analysis of the Visegrad Countries during 2014– percentage change of export market shares meas2016 revealed that all external indicators of MIP are ured in values, 3-year percentage change of the real in the thresholds, excluding the net internation- effective exchange rates based on HICP/CPI deflaal investment position as percent of GDP (Figure tors, relative to 41 other industrial countries, 3-year 3). 3-year backward moving average of the percentage change in nominal unit labor cost are in current account balance as percent of GDP, 5-year the framework of the thresholds (Table 4) It should be noticed, that Ukrainian official da- the results of analysis revealed that tabases don’t correspond to the EU databases; as Ukraine has approximately the same results as a consequence it is very difficult to analyze the Visegrad Countries in 2016 on external and intermicroeconomic imbalance according to the MIP, nal imbalances, employment indicators.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
