<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe Volume 21 (2018), No. 1</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24286</link>
<description/>
<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2026 18:25:35 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:date>2026-04-05T18:25:35Z</dc:date>

<item>
<title>Competitiveness as the Ability to Adjust: the EU–10 Exports Structure and Its Convergence to the German Pattern</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24293</link>
<description>Competitiveness as the Ability to Adjust: the EU–10 Exports Structure and Its Convergence to the German Pattern
Czarny, Elżbieta; Żmuda, Małgorzata
Competitiveness of a nation is associated with a set of characteristics that enable structural adjustment to global technological trends, and as a consequence, a rise in the living standard of its citizens. For catching-up economies, GDP convergence towards the most developed economies, constituting their developmental goal, relies upon its ability to shift production and exports structure towards specialization based on knowledge and innovation. Thus, in this paper, competitiveness is evaluated through structural adjustments of exports, and for catching-up economies (the EU–10 states) it may be understood as the ability to close the structural gap to the most developed countries (here: the strongest EU member economy: Germany). We analyse the evolution of the EU–10 nations’ exports specialization in the years 2000 and 2014, checking whether the convergence towards the German exports pattern can be observed, and which of the analysed economies shows the best ability to shift its exports structure towards high-tech specialization. We look additionally at exports structures in 2004 (the year of EU-accession of eight out of 10 countries in the sample) and in 2009 (world trade collapse during the economic crisis). The analysis is based on the Revealed Comparative Advantage (RCA) concept by Balassa (1965). We use the UN Trade Statistics data in the Standard International Trade Classification (SITC), Rev. 4. Commodity groups are classified following the methodology developed by Wysokińska (1997, p. 18).
</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24293</guid>
<dc:date>2018-03-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Is Economic Integration a Historical Shock to City-size Distribution?</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24291</link>
<description>Is Economic Integration a Historical Shock to City-size Distribution?
Sorhun, Engin
Based on the assumption that the economic integration process contributes, via market reforms, to the dynamics of the space distribution in candidate countries, this study examines (i) whether agglomeration forces or dispersion forces are dominant; (ii) whether EU-integration causes a structural break to the space distribution over time; (iii) whether EU-integration makes the city-size distribution more even or uneven in eight eastern European Union members (EU–8). To carry out the analysis, the Ziwot-Andrew and Cusum Square tests are used to detect structural breaks; the ARDL Bound test is used to reveal the interaction between long-run and short-run equilibrium; and the Granger test is used to determine the direction of the causality among the variables. The main results are: the integration with the EU (i) caused a structural break to the city-size distribution, (ii) made the city-size distribution more uneven and (iii) stimulated the agglomerating forces over the spreading forces in the EU–8.
</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24291</guid>
<dc:date>2018-03-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Normative Versus Positive Approach to Fiscal Decentralisation and the Measures of Decentralisation. An Analysis based on the Example of Selected Countries of Central and Eastern Europe</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24292</link>
<description>Normative Versus Positive Approach to Fiscal Decentralisation and the Measures of Decentralisation. An Analysis based on the Example of Selected Countries of Central and Eastern Europe
Guziejewska, Beata
This article deals with the problem of a discrepancy between the recommendations of the theory of public finance, in its various trends, and decentralisation processes in practice. The analysis is both theoretical and empirical. The aim of the discussion is to present the theoretical findings regarding fiscal decentralisation as well as to compare them with the recommendations of the fiscal decentralisation doctrine and with the trends in the practice of local government finances in Poland and selected countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The literature on the subject, studies by international institutions, as well as data from Eurostat and the European Commission are used in the deliberations. Two groups of countries were subject to a comparative analysis: the Visegrad Group Countries and the three Baltic states. These countries differ significantly in the scope of their fiscal decentralisation. Latvia, the Czech Republic and Poland seem to be most advanced in the process. In the conclusion of the study, a recommendation for a wider use of property taxes and the so-called ‘additions to state taxes’ is put forward.
</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24292</guid>
<dc:date>2018-03-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Towards the Goals of the Europe 2020 Strategy: Convergence or Divergence of the European Union Countries?</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24290</link>
<description>Towards the Goals of the Europe 2020 Strategy: Convergence or Divergence of the European Union Countries?
Szymańska, Agata; Zalewska, Elżbieta
The aim of this article is to investigate the similarities between the EU countries in terms of achieving the Europe 2020 Strategy goals. Due to the latest data availability, the analysis is based on the year 2014. The study uses grouping methods, including the k-means algorithm. The results indicate the existence of a division between the “old” and “new” European Union Member States. However, as is shown, some of the Strategy’s targets have already been achieved and some indicators have been nearly achieved, whereas among others, such as implementation of the headline indicator for investment in the R&amp;D sector as a % of GDP is uncertain. The average performance of headline indicators for the EU–15 and EU–13 countries seems to be similar and exhibits the same trend of changes.
</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/11089/24290</guid>
<dc:date>2018-03-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
