Legacies of State Socialism: A Comparative Study of Elite Attitudes towards EU Economic Competitiveness in Western and Central Eastern Europe

Abstract

The elites of Western Europe prefer social security for all citizens as the major aim of the EU, while the preference of Central and Eastern European elites is for a more globally competitive European economy. This disparity between elite preferences may be accounted for by the distinct electorates and elites’ responsive strategic calculations, or by the process of socialisation Central and Eastern European elites undergo during exposure to the EU. This article argues that the predominant reason for the difference in elite attitudes towards economic competition is the lasting effect of state socialism in Central and Eastern European countries.     

Social Inequality and Assessments of Democracy and the Market: Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe

Considerable comparative scholarly attention has been paid to various aspects of mass support for democracy and the market. However, despite strong theoretical suggestions of a linkage, little is known about the impact of social inequality on this support. We address this issue using evidence from mass surveys undertaken in 12 post-communist states in 2007, supplemented by country-level data about economic and political performance. Specifically, we investigate whether social inequality generates negative perceptions that democracy and the market will lead to social conflict and if it increases support for anti-democratic forms of governance. Notably, we find little link between citizens’ expectations of social conflict and national-level indices of income inequality. However, we do find a link between perceptions of the extent of social inequality and expectations of market-generated—but not democracy-generated—conflict. Underscoring these positive and negative findings, perceptions of social inequality are also clearly consequential for support for ‘strong-hand’ economic government but not for anti-democratic leadership.     

多种文明视角下的中东欧社会发展

从古到今,无论在地理位置上还是地缘政治上,处于西欧和东欧之间的中东欧地区都十分重要。由于受不同文明的影响和东西方大国的控制,该地区的民族和国家在很大程度上不能为自己做主,社会发展带有极强的被动性。这是观察正在集体回归西欧的中东欧社会发展的一个重要视角,有助于发现其历史发展逻辑和潜在的动因。文明归宿上的困惑和政治定位上的摇摆是中东欧社会发展的常态,而在其自身认同和同东西方大国对它们的认同上的矛盾会长久存在。     

Knowledge-Sharing Subsidiaries in Central and Eastern Europe

This paper investigates reverse knowledge transfer of foreign multinational subsidiaries in Central and Eastern Europe (Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary) in the light of the current political and economic transformations of these former communist countries. The study examines whether foreign subsidiaries in the region share their knowledge base with their sister-subsidiaries and parent company, and the role of various factors in this knowledge sharing. These factors include subsidiary initiative, subsidiary autonomy, local dynamism and corporate embeddedness. A proprietary dataset is used for statistical analysis.     

Between Apprehension and Support: Social Dialogue,Democracy, and Industrial Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe

This article explores the attitudes of trade union organizations to restructuring and privatization of their enterprises to strategic foreign investors in Central and Eastern Europe's biggest steel producers: Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, and Slovakia. Contrary to advocates of insulating technocratic decision-makers from social partners, this article argues that higher quality of democracy and concomitant social dialogue carried out at the level of the sector with union organizations that are autonomous of the government in power (as was the case in the Czech Republic and Poland), are associated with greater restructuring and with support for privatization to strategic foreign investors. In these circumstances, the unions actually pressure reluctant governments to accelerate the privatization process. By contrast, politically motivated capture of individual enterprise-level unions and splitting them from sectoral-level organizations, as occurred in countries with lower quality of democracy (Romania and Slovakia), weakens the autonomous sectoral-level organizations, which are generally supportive of restructuring. Conversely, captured unions remain far more resistant to reform than their counterparts belonging to autonomous sectoral organizations. Thus, higher quality of democracy and concomitant vibrant social dialogue safeguard industrial restructuring.     

Social shock in transforming Central and Eastern Europe

Central and Eastern European societies, in spite of significant successes of transformation, are in a social shock. Economic hardship, unemployment, lower income and even poverty for many, and social polarization played a role in disappointment. The main reason of social shock, however, was cultural, the sharp collision of state socialist, and traditional values on the one hand and new values and social behavioral requirements on the other. The doors opened widely, but most of the people were frightened to enter into an unknown world. Social-behavioral changes are generations-long processes.     

中东欧经济转轨与全球化

苏东剧变后,中东欧国家毫无例外地摒弃了计划经济,实行市场经济。从1989年开始,这个转轨进程已经历时14年,并与全球化进程有着密切的关系。     

Cohesion Policy and the Evolution of Regional Policy in Central and Eastern Europe

The paper considers the extent to which domestic regional policy in the Central East European EU member states has been ‘subsumed’ into cohesion policy approaches. It acknowledges that directions of domestic regional policy change vary with processes of EU policy transfer, adaptation, emulation or resistance. This variation occurs across time and across member states. Crucially, the paper argues that interaction between cohesion policy and national regional policy systems also varies according to different regional policy components. Drawing on research from across the member states, the analysis breaks policy down into a number of key dimensions (objectives, instruments, spatial targeting and governance) and assesses the interaction between EU and domestic approaches and agendas.     

Continuity and change in Russia's policy toward Central and Eastern Europe

The accession of the CEE states to NATO and the European Union has put an end to the geopolitical ambiguity and implicit insecurity in the region between Russia and the so-called ‘Old Europe’. Instead of being an area of great powers' rivalry, elements of ‘buffer belts’ lacking meaningful strategic options, objects of raw Nazi-Soviet deals, or zones under Russian occupation and domination, the three Baltic States and the Visegrad group countries became full-fledged members of the European Union and were given NATO's security guarantees. By the middle of the 2000s, one would conclude that traditional geopolitics had ended in this region.However, the changes in the strategic situation in CEE have not changed the deep rooted moving forces and long-term strategic goals of the Russian policy toward the region. Moscow seeks to have the position, as its official rhetoric says, of an ‘influential centre of a multipolar world’ that would be nearly equal to the USA, China, or the EU. With this in view Moscow seeks for the establishment of its domination over the new independent states of the former USSR and for the formation of a sphere of influence for itself in Central Eastern Europe. If it achieves these goals, then Europe may return once again to traditional geopolitics fraught with great power rivalries and permanent instabilities radiating far beyond CEE borders.Yet a few questions remain. Has Russia come to the conclusion that attempting to restore its privileged position of influence in Central-Eastern Europe is wrong? Has Russia enough power to threaten the CEE countries? How credible are NATO's security guarantees? How may Russian behavior in CEE affect a wider European geopolitical context? These questions are appropriate in the light of Russia's ‘resurgence’ as a revanchist power and because Russia is, and most probably will remain in the next five to ten years, a weighty economic and strategic factor in areas along the Western borders of the former USSR.     

Reassessing Democratic Consolidation in Central and Eastern Europe and the Role of the EU

Over the past two decades, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have completed a long transition from authoritarian rule, and joining the EU has been considered to be an indication of the end of the consolidation process. However, this path was anything but linear and in many cases it was marked by concentration and abuse of executive power, a systematic political patronage and a plebiscitary interpretation of democracy. In order to shed light on the meaning of these phenomena, this paper provides for an analysis of democratic consolidation in these countries by way of comparing the cases of Bulgaria, Poland and Slovakia.