Causes of the retarded integration of EU and CIS-countries
Bogdan Gorokhovskij
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 3,
2002
Abstract
Die wirtschaftliche Integration zwischen der EU und den drei GUS-Ländern Russland, Ukraine und Belarus (GUS-3) befindet sich auf einem vergleichsweise niedrigen Entwicklungsstand. Verantwortlich dafür ist ein nur enger handelspolitischer Rahmen der Liberalisierung in Form von Partnerschafts- und Kooperationsabkommen. Dieser Rahmen wurde zudem von den drei Ländern nicht ausreichend umgesetzt. Gründe dafür waren erstens die noch unzureichende institutionelle Transformation in den Ländern, zweitens der geringe Anreiz, den diese Abkommen für die Länder bieten, und drittens die mangelnde Einbettung in längerfristige strategische Ziele. Eine Intensivierung der Wirtschaftsbeziehungen mit den GUS-Ländern ist aber erforderlich, wenn die erweiterte Union ihrem Ziel, das Wohlstandsgefälle zwischen ihr und der GUS zu verringern, näherkommen möchte. Die erste Voraussetzung dazu ist die Fortführung der institutionellen und marktwirtschaftlichen Transformation in den GUS-Ländern. Aber auch unter diesen günstigeren Bedingungen würden sich die Partnerschafts- und Kooperationsabkommen als wenig effektiv erweisen. Angesichts der bereits erreichten Reformfortschritte in Russland und der Ukraine wäre zu überlegen, die bisherigen Abkommen durch einen umfassenden Zollabbau zu ergänzen.
Read article
Intra-industry trade between European Union and Transition Economies. Does income distribution matter?
Hubert Gabrisch, Maria Luigia Segnana
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 155,
2002
Abstract
EU-TE trade is increasingly characterised by intra-industry trade. For some countries (Czech Republic), the share of intra-industry trade in total trade with the EU approaches 60 percent. The decomposition of intra-industry trade into horizontal and vertical shares reveals overwhelming vertical structures with strong quality advantages for the EU and shrinking quality advantages for TE countries wherever trade has been liberalised. Empirical research on factors determining this structure in an EU-TE framework has lagged theoretical and empirical research on horizontal trade and vertical trade in other regions of the world. The main objective of this paper is, therefore, to contribute to the ongoing debate over EU-TE trade structures, by offering an explanation of intra-industry trade. We utilize a cross-country approach in which relative wage differences and country size play a leading role. In addition, as implied by a model of the productquality
cycle, we examine income distribution factors as determinates of the emerging
EU-TE structure of trade flows. Using OLS regressions, we find first, that relative
differences in wages (per capita income) and country size explain intra-industry trade, when trade is vertical and completely liberalized and second, that cross country differences in income distribution play no explanatory role. We conclude that if increasing wage differences resulted from an increasing productivity gap between highquality and low-quality industries, then vertical structures will, over the long-term create significant barriers for the increase in TE incomes and lowering EU-TE income differentials.
Read article
Improved competitiveness of CEFTA countries in trade with European Union
Klaus Werner
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 7,
1995
Abstract
Read article
Structural Changes in Trade Relations between the European Union and Central and Eastern Europe since 1991
Klaus Werner
Externe Publikationen,
1995
Abstract
Read article
Uncovered Workers in Plants Covered by Collective Bargaining: Who Are They and How Do They Fare?
Boris Hirsch, Philipp Lentge, Claus Schnabel
Abstract
In Germany, employers used to pay union members and non-members in a plant the same union wage in order to prevent workers from joining unions. Using recent administrative data, we investigate which workers in firms covered by collective bargaining agreements still individually benefit from these union agreements, which workers are not covered anymore, and what this means for their wages. We show that about 9 percent of workers in plants with collective agreements do not enjoy individual coverage (and thus the union wage) anymore. Econometric analyses with unconditional quantile regressions and firm-fixed-effects estimations demonstrate that not being individually covered by a collective agreement has serious wage implications for most workers. Low-wage non-union workers and those at low hierarchy levels particularly suffer since employers abstain from extending union wages to them in order to pay lower wages. This jeopardizes unions' goal of protecting all disadvantaged workers.
Read article
