P5 - Comparative Economic SystemsReturn

In the paper we analyze economic university research and education in transition countries. University system differs from industry in the nature of output that it produces. University system is engaged in production of public goods rather than private goods. The sector also suffers from the measurement problem of quality of its output. We argue that because of these factors reforms were slower in this sector leading to low productivity growth. Pressure groups succeeded in gaining significant control inside administrative structures regulating the sector. By creating the accreditation commission the state decreases the communication cost of pressure groups making lobbing activity cheaper. A case study from the Czech Republic and Slovakia shows that the accreditation commission which is composed from representatives of state universities and established research institutes succeeded in maintaining their dominant position and set evaluation criteria fitting their interests. This institutional setting led to low university research productivity. The results also show that in Slovakia economic research is still predominantly carried out by central research institutes and universities are engaged mainly in teaching.

The study focuses on evaluation of institutional quality in European Union countries and its possible impact on economic performance and competitiveness. The text stems from the theoretical framework of new institutional economics, especially historical and comparative institutionalism, and it bases on the concept of good governance. The source of the evaluation is the scheme of the World Bank Governance Matters, supplemented with research of other institutions working with individual institutional characteristics. Authors evaluate following characteristics - voice and accountability, political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law and control of corruption, which together form aggregate indicator of institutional quality. Old member countries of European Union (EU-15) are classified into different models of capitalism according to their different institutional quality. Institutional changes in new member countries (EU-10, eventually EU-8) in period 1996-2004 illustrate both institutional adjustment of postcommunist countries and dynamics of these changes and their convergence to different types of capitalism.

The study examines the changes of the Central Eastern European region first in the context of world history. It confirms by comparative historical analyses that the transformation was indeed unique. This has been the only total transformation that took place peacefully, without violence, and at the same time astonishingly fast, in the main direction of the economic and the political changes of Western civilization. From that perspective it is an exceptional success story. However, from the perspective of everyday life, the result is different. Deep economic troubles are experienced by a considerable portion of the population. The perception of losses is intensified by various cognitive problems. Based on the experience of today's generation, evaluating the change as an unequivocal success would be unwarranted. Both approaches are justified: it would be wrong to blend the two and to weigh them by the same scale.