The role of country brand in providing economic resilience

Svitlana Shymon,Joanna Osiejewicz,Dariusz Krawczyk,Evhenia Kolomiets-Ludwig,Bozena Kaminska

doi:10.21272/mmi.2020.1-26

Abstract

The paper summarised arguments and counterarguments on analysis of economic resilience. The bibliometric analysis on economic resilience using the software VOSviewer allowed identifying the four core scientific schools: R. Martin (University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom); A. Rose University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States; C.S. Holling; H. Wolman (The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., United States); I. Briguglio (L-Università ta' Malta, Msida, Malta). The generalisation of the scientific papers and approaches on solving issues mentioned above proved that the core indicators of economic resilience assessment were macroeconomic stability; microeconomic market efficiency; good governance; social development. The paper aimed at the analysis of the marketing determinants impact on the economic vulnerability of the country. The hypothesis of the paper was no statistically significant difference in the level of economic vulnerability for countries that implement effective branding policies and do not take appropriate actions. The study checked hypothesis using the methods and instruments as follows: for the normal distribution of the statistical data – the Shapiro-Wilk test; verification of the equality of dispersion in the statistical data using the Levine’s test; parametric (One-way ANOVA: F-test) or non-parametric test (Kruskal-Wallis rank test). The object of the investigation was European Union countries which were classified on the six groups by the experts of the FutureBrand rating. The empirical data confirmed the hypothesis mentioned above. Thus, the findings proved no statistically significant difference between the leading indicators of the level of economic vulnerability according to the essential component – macroeconomic stability, which was estimated using indicators: General government deficit (-) and surplus (+) - annual data; unemployment rate. Keywords brand, government deficit, government surplus, unemployment rate, ANOVA

Highlights

Economic resilience means stable economic functioning and developing
The results of the analysis showed that according to FutureBrand (2019) all countries were classified by six groups: the first group – the countries which occupied the 1-10 places (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg, Sweden); 2 group – countries on 11-20 places (France, Italy, Netherlands); 3 group – countries on 21-30 (Belgium, Portugal, Spain); 4 group – countries on 21-30 (Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Slovakia); 5 group – countries on 41-50 (Romania, Poland); 4 group – countries were not included in the rating (Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Slovenia)
The obtained results Shapiro-Wilk and Levenes tests confirmed the using of Kruskal-Wallis rank test for UN and GGD – Oneway ANOVA: F-test

Summary

Introduction

Economic resilience means stable economic functioning and developing. At the same time, the providing of economic resilience depends on the effect of the deferent parameters in time and place. In the papers (Briguglio et al, 2006; Briguglio et al, 2008; Briguglio et al, 2009; Briguglio, 2016) the authors defined economic vulnerability as «the exposure of an economy to exogenous shocks, arising out of economic openness» тоді, як «economic resilience» – «the policy-induced ability of an economy to withstand or recover from the effects of such shocks» In this case, the scientist used to estimate the economic resilience the following indicators: the fiscal deficit to GDP ratio, unemployment rate, inflation rate, the external debt to GDP ratio (value of macroeconomic stability); Economic Freedom of the World Index (explain to indicators Microeconomic market efficiency and Good governance); Human Development Index (allowed estimating Social development) (Briguglio et al, 2006; Briguglio et al, 2008; Briguglio et al, 2009; Briguglio, 2016). In the end, considering the findings from the previous stage (figure 4), the authors used parametric (One-way ANOVA: F-test) or non-parametric (Kruskal-Wallis rank test) tests (Butt, 2006)

Wilcoxon Ranksum test

Within groups

Findings

Conclusions