Specific Features of Economic Cooperation of Russia and China with Central and Eastern European Countries

Haemophilia care in Central and Eastern Europe: challenges and ways forward from clinicians' perspective.

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.

Aim. The work aimed to assess the impact of industrial production in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) on the dynamics of trade in mechanical engineering products between these countries and the Russian Federation (RF) in the context of the latest geopolitical conditions.Objectives. The work seeks to analyze statistical data on the dynamics of trade relations between Russia and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the field of mechanical engineering at the current stage; to construct econometric models for regression analysis of the impact of industrial production on the dynamics of trade in mechanical engineering products; to determine the main trends in trade interaction between Russia and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the mechanical engineering sector in 2022–2024.Methods. The study employed research methods, namely statistical and econometric analysis, syntax, description, graphical modeling.Results. The econometric analysis provided reliable coefficients of regression models; however their values were small. This indicates that the impact of industrial production in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe on the key indicators of trade in engineering products between these countries and Russia was ambiguous and unclear.Conclusions. Current geopolitical realities have determined unfavorable medium-term trends in the trade interaction between Russia and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the engineering sector. The regression models coefficients obtained as a result of econometric analysis showed a small correlation between industrial production in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the export of engineering products to Russia. It implies that the decline in industrial production in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe had little effect on the volume of engineering products exported by them to Russia.

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.

PurposeThis paper aims to assess how a hotel geographical location in different parts of Central and Eastern Europe influences the complexity of perception of pro-environmental behavior.Design/methodology/approachTo find out, whether hotel location in a specific country influences the complexity of environmental practices, this study used two closely connected multivariate statistical techniques analyzing gradients: principal components analysis and partial redundancy analysis. The research comprises data collection from seven countries in Central and Eastern Europe. In all, 25 randomly selected hotels (based on star rating) from various countries were approached to complete a questionnaire. Environmental practices were studied based on motivations, perception of barriers, perception of support from different levels of public sector, will of managers to promote pro-environmental measures based on sufficient funding, perception of legislation and perception of various other important factors.FindingsThe study reveals significant differences between hotels in Central Europe and Eastern Europe in the perception of the complexity in implementation of the environmental practices by hotel managers. The character of the present study, however, needs to address the identification of particular aspects that are relevant to the geographical differences among the studied countries.Research limitations/implicationsResearch was limited to a selection of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. There is still probability that managers in hotels from Poland and Croatia could possess different preferences. Other limitation of this study is that only special part of hotels were asked – hotels certified by star grading, out of our scope remained other hotels. It is also known that important factor is precise location of hotel within country – hotels in established tourism destination behave other way that those outside recreational areas. These factors deserve further study within this topic. There are many aspects of sustainability and environmental protection regarding hotel industry. As we have found in our principal correspondence analysis, different environmental measures were different location in biplot – some were affected by country, the other by star grading and affiliation to hotel chain. The complexity deserves to be studied in depth.Practical implicationsThe importance lies first in the identification of the aspects that are governed by geographical differences among the countries studied. These aspects are the initiatives and support from the government and the local governments, which counteract the perception that there is a lack of financial resources and the return on investments is slow. So, based on the data, which included information from various types of hotels from seven CEE countries, the activities of national and local authorities were identified to be the main differentiating variable. The support of the environment-friendly conduct of business in the hotel industry is appreciated by hotel managers from Central Europe. On the other hand, hotel managers from Eastern Europe do not feel any significant support from either national or other public institutions. The second factor of differentiation is represented by the perception of the lack of funds. Hotel managers from Eastern Europe feel strongly about funds limitation. The coherence of both those factors is obvious in the results, as they show the same direction but opposite orientation. It has already been discussed above. When looking at the results, the authors find the perception of availability of funds to be a fundamental difference between hotel management in Central Europe and in Eastern Europe. The lack of funds is perceived more intensively in Eastern Europe than in Central Europe, particularly because of a stronger awareness of direct or indirect support for such activities by national and other public institutions in Central Europe.Social implicationsThe differentiation of the aspects mentioned above comes from the social and culture policies, company policies and business cultures between these two sub-realms. Pro-environmental actions are apparently promoted less publicly in Eastern European countries than in Central European countries. The reaction to the trend for demand of greener hotels is stronger in the West, and its hotels are more likely to have legislation requirements and public support as an incentive to adopt pro-environmental measures in their business operations.Originality/valueThe study is based on data obtained from seven countries. The results revealed a problem of the macro-environmental influence on hotels’ potential to implement environmentally sustainable approaches and procedures throughout the industry.

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.

PurposeThis study evaluates the accessibility of websites for publicly listed commercial banks in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, with a specific focus on the relationship between website accessibility and bank cost management indicators.Design/methodology/approachWe analyzed the websites of 26 publicly listed banks across nine CEE countries using the web accessibility evaluation tool (WAVE), a widely recognized tool for assessing website accessibility. We supplemented the analysis with cost management data, including general and administrative expenses and the cost-to-income (C/I) ratio, sourced from the Equity RT database and annual bank reports where necessary.FindingsThe study reveals significant disparities in website accessibility among publicly listed banks in the CEE region. Larger banks tend to have better website accessibility for individuals with disabilities. However, we found no significant relationship between cost management indicators, such as general and administrative expenses or the C/I ratio, and the number of accessibility errors reported by WAVE at national and individual bank levels.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is limited to publicly listed banks in Central and Eastern Europe, which may not represent the broader banking sector in the region. Moreover, as the sole assessment tool, WAVE may not capture all dimensions of web accessibility.Practical implicationsThe findings suggest that while larger banks may invest more in web accessibility, cost management practices do not directly influence website accessibility improvements. This could inform future strategies for banks aiming to enhance their digital inclusivity.Originality/valueThis research provides new insights into the relationship between bank size, cost management practices and web accessibility in the CEE region, contributing to the limited literature on digital inclusivity in the banking sector.

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.

Past and present engagement in space activities in Central and Eastern Europe

Cooperation between China and Central and Eastern European (CEE) Countries means China's cooperation with the above 16 countries. In 2012, China and 16 China–CEE countries jointly established a new cooperation platform, i.e. Cooperation between China and CEE Countries. The cooperation between China and CEE countries promotes a benign interaction and overall balanced development of the Belt and Road Initiative in the CEE region. The Belt and Road Initiative also creates many important opportunities for the cooperation between China and CEE countries. The economic and trade cooperation between China and CEE countries has expanded in scale and also deepened. The economic and trade cooperation between China and the CEE countries has not only strongly boosted the economic development of relevant countries, but also provided an effective channel for Chinese equipment, technologies, standards and service to go global.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to modify the gravity model to identify the main determinants of the European Union (EU) bank lending to the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) countries during 1994-2012.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses both two-stage least squares and dynamic generalized method of moments to estimate the modified gravity model.FindingsThis study finds that the CEE countries with more developed stock markets have received the higher EU bank lending inflows. The EU banks have greater access to additional financing in the stock markets. Second, the higher stock market difference between the CEE and EU countries has boosted the EU bank lending. Compared to the developed EU stock markets, the less developed CEE stock markets have become more favorable to the EU banks seeking to earn higher profits.Research limitations/implicationsThe CEE countries can further boost the EU bank lending inflows through deepening capital liberalization. They should facilitate easy foreign bank entry by reducing excessive bank legislations and regulations. Moreover, they can promote the EU bank lending through substantial EU bank integration. This can accelerate the major bank reform which would facilitate better bank supervision and regulations.Originality/valueMost previous studies have primarily used the macroeconomic and institutional factors to explain the EU bank lending. In contrast, this study explores the growing importance of the CEE financial development and bilateral trade in explaining the EU bank lending.

The Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries have undergone exceptional economic boom over the past two decades maintaining sustainable growth. The economic environment determines that in these countries GDP grew more rapidly compared to the core EU states implementing their continuous convergence, although some cyclical slowdown will be observed. Nevertheless, due to the rapidly changing, globalising business environment and the emerging unprecedented challenges linked to the constantly raising ratio of high added value content knowledge-based products and services, digitization era including many disruptive technological solutions, the shortcomings of the global supply and vendor chains, lack of materials and components in many industrial sector, the negative social and economic impacts of COVID-19 pandemic besides the unpredictable other events (e.g. outbroken war between Russian and Ukraine), the CEE countries have been forcing to restructuring their economies. This economic transformation process means making significant shift from the previous export-oriented, foreign capital inflow (FDI) attractive exogenous factors driven economic growth toward the endogenous, innovation and knowledge-based economy driven development to speed-up their catching up processes to the developed core EU member states changing the middle-income trap phenomenon. It means that due to raising of the labour workforce incomes the CEE countries cannot compete anymore with their exogenous, FDI attraction-oriented driven economic development model but they are weak yet for the time being to producing innovation-based, high added value content products and cutting-edge technologies improving their national economical competitive positions integrating on higher level in the global value chains. In order to overcome these difficulties and find the best, adequate solutions for the next time period 2021-2027, it is definitely need to analyse the past decade economic growth patterns and regional disparities of CEE countries. Despite all of them have to face the almost the same future challenges but their past economic structure have had different characteristics and reached the economic growth on different pathways due to their historical, social and economic background. The aim of this paper is to reveal the past economic growth patterns, development dynamics and the regional disparities in the CEE region and the possible reasons beyond that via comprehensive benchmark analysis.

Russian FDI in Central and Eastern European Countries: Opportunities and Threats

PurposeThe aim of this research is to investigate and detect determinants of the training practice and conspicuous differences in the sample of nine Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries (Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Serbia and Romania). The study was conducted with three distinct objectives: the investigation of the training and development (T&D) practices in the CEE region, the investigation of the determinants of T&D practices in the CEE region and the measurement of the differences between the economies in the sample of CEE countries regarding their T&D practices.Design/methodology/approachThe research is based on the Cranet research network results from 2015 to 2016. The data for the CEE countries were selected in order to investigate the determinants of T&D practice, and the differences between these economies. The nine CEE countries were divided into two groups, on the basis on the variety of capitalism (VoC approach), in order to investigate its effects on the T&D practices. T-test, chi-square test, Spearman correlation tests and hierarchical moderated regression model were used to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsThere are statistically significant differences between the organizations from coordinated market economy (CME) countries and liberal market economy (LME) countries in the case of the percentage of GDP of the country spent on education, the percentage of annual payroll costs of the organizations spent on training, the percentage of annual staff turnover, the implementation of the systematic evaluation of training needs, the training effectiveness, the existence of T&D strategy and the primary responsibility for major policy decisions on T&D. The results of the regression model showed that the majority of national and organizational level factors have a statistically significant relationship with the percentage of the annual payroll costs of the organization spent on training. Variety of capitalism moderates the relationship between independent variables and the dependent variable, too.Research limitations/implicationsIn the presented model, the authors excluded from their investigation the effects of MNCs. It must further be stated that only the data from the latest Cranet research round were used, thus it was not possible to investigate the development of the training practice in CEE over a longer time period. These limitations could be used as possible directions for further research in the relevant area of HRM in the CEE region.Originality/valueSince there is relatively little empirical research in the relation between capitalism type and T&D practice, especially in the region of CEE, the present paper lends new insight into this issue as well as into comparative HRM. It is hoped that this work can be taken as a starting point for further research.