(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)IntroductionInsufficient level of development of the institutions and dissatisfactory character of their use in practice represent a big problem in Montenegro, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Many of the influential economists explained the importance of institutions for economic development. D. North (1987), R. Levine and W. Easterly (2003) concluded that development of institutions is the only variable that can explain the difference in the achieved level of development between countries.The existence and reproduction of institutional deficit in the economic sense are reflected through the low level of institutional rationality. This problem is manifested through high transaction costs and bad economic indicators. Consequences are numerous, and some of the most significant ones are as follows: low living standard, economic downturn, insufficient motivation to increase economic efficiency, high monopolization, connections between business and the authorities, degradation of production activity and national resources, underdeveloped ownership structure in entrepreneurial activities, boom of privileged entrepreneurship (individualism), high degree of non-market enrichment and social differentiation, significant scope of disinvestment, etc.Due to the aforementioned, this paper analyzes perception of the level of institutional rationality (dependent variable) and its basic (selected) impact factors (independent variables) in the mentioned countries of South East Europe (SEE).In these countries the official economic policy was, and still remains, neoliberal. Many authors emphasize that it actually experienced a fiasco, and that it was even abused by the establishments (nomenklatura) in power. For that reason, it is logical that it is blamed for all of the economic mistakes. Because, an economy is not comprised of economic entities only, which mutually interact, but there is also a system of institutions that guide and direct them.The recent global economic crisis showed that neoliberal monistic theses of uncontrolled and self-regulatory market are ungrounded. An additional problem in the observed countries of SEE is the opportunistic activity of the so-called alternative institutions, which represent the very heart of the inhibitors to development. It is considered that out-of-market distribution of privileges lead to numerous conflicts not only between the different manners of organization of political and economic activity in the country, but within these social sub-systems as well. Besides, following the expressed institutional monism of a neoliberal type, it was suitable for the development of alternative institutions, which prevented the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic institutions (Delibasic, 2016, p. 150). Numerous economists from the SEE countries agree that deficit, rejection, ignoring and imitation of real institutional changes enabled for the domination of interest-oriented anti-institutional development inhibitors.State regulation represents an important economic institution. Its function is to create the conditions for the development of all other economic institutions (market and property regulation) in accordance with the social preferences. In order to do that, it is necessary to have efficient legislative, judicial and executive power. For that reason, the rule of law is marked as the first factor of impact on the level of institutional rationality. The second factor of impact is the level of development and efficiency of pluralistic institutions. The third factor of impact is the development of the overall institutional environment, comprised of the civil society and the socio-cultural capital. Finally, the fourth important factor of impact is the existence of the opportunistic behavior (privileged, corruptive and non-market) and the corresponding alternative institutions - shadow ones (Infante and Smirnova, 2016, pp. …
Read full abstract