- citati u SCIndeksu: 0
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:7
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:5
|
|
|
2021, vol. 55, br. 4, str. 1285-1300
|
|
Centralnoevropske pripreme za evropske integracije
Central European preparation for the European integration
Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary, Institute of Social Sciences and International Studies, Budapest, Hungary
e-adresa: becsey.zsolt@kre.hu
Sažetak
Pored autorovog naučnog rada, prisutna je i pragmatična analiza faktora koji su karakterisali centralnoevropske države pre promene režima (1990.), a zatim i strani ekonomski model kroz koji su Poljska, Mađarska, Češka i Slovačka ("Višegradska četvorka") 2004. godine ostvarile članstvo u Evropskoj uniji. U studiji se ističe kako su, na različitim nivoima, u svim posmatranim državama ekonomske politike bile karakterisane liberalnim propisima o bankrotu i strogim uslovima konkurencije, tako da su mogle dokazati svoju sposobnost da ispune uslove za države članice EU u pogledu funkcionisanja tržišne ekonomije. Model orijentisan ka izvozu, zasnovan na efikasnom prilivu direktnih stranih investicija i razvoju tehnologije u ranim 1990-im, bio je primenjen do kasnih 1990-ih kako bi se pokazala spremnost ovih država da ispune ostale uslove za članstvo u EU, odnosno da savladaju izazove unutrašnjeg tržišta. Ova transformacija predstavljala je problem za postojeći finansijski balans 1990-ih (uglavnom zbog gubitka tradicionalnih izvoznih kapaciteta) jedino u sredini ove decenije, dok je samo na kraju decenije postojao pozitivan bilans trgovinske razmene sa EU. Postizanje ukupnog spoljnog ekvilibrijuma Višegradske četvorke bilo je zadržano činjenicom da priliv direktnih stranih investicije još nije počeo, u sadejstvu sa povlačenjem profita iz poslednjih investicija u Centralnoj Evropi, kao i efektom protivteže neto transfera u EU, koji su pristizali kasnije paralelno sa početkom povlačenja dividendi od direktnih stranih investicija. Saradnja u okviru Cefta sporazuma zaključenog 1992. godine pratila je razvoj ekonomske liberalizacije Višegradske četvorke sa EU paralelno, ali ne i dublje od toga iz razloga političke korektnosti. Potpuno međusobno otvaranje bilo je moguće samo putem članstva u EU, konkretno govoreći liberalizacija u oblasti usluga ili osetljive trgovine u poljoprivredi. Cefta sporazum proširen je 1995. godine na Balkan, te je i dalje dobar primer za države koje ne žele da ostanu u bivšem sovjetskom ili bivšem jugoslovenskom modelu ekonomske integracije, ali i metod pripreme za najranije moguće učlanjenje u EU.
Abstract
In addition to the author's scientific work, the study -based on pragmatic experiences -analyses the factors that characterized Central European countries before the change of regime (1990) and then the foreign economic model through which Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia ("Visegrád 4") reached EU membership in 2004. The study highlighted that, with different depths, in all countries concerned economic policies were characterized by liberal bankruptcy regulations and strict conditions of competition, so that they could prove their ability to meet the condition of a functioning market economy for EU membership1. The export-oriented model, built on efficient inflow of foreign direct investment and high-tech in the early 1990s, was implemented by the late 1990s to demonstrate that these states were ready to meet another condition of EU membership, namely to meet the challenges of the internal market.2 This transformation represented a problem for the current account balance in the 1990s (mainly due to the loss of traditional national export capacities) only in the middle of the decade, and it was only at the end of the decade that trade balances showed surplus with the EU. The total external equilibrium of the Visegrád countries was maintained by the fact that the inflow of FDI had not yet started to conclude in the withdrawal of profits from recent investments in Central Europe, and the countervailing effect of EU net transfers, which began to arrive later parallelly with the start of the withdrawal of FDI dividends. The CEFTA co-operation concluded in 1992 followed the economic liberalization timetable of that of the Visegrád Four with the EU parallelly but did not go beyond its depth for political prudence, thus providing full opening to each other only after and through EU membership, more precisely the liberalisation in services or in sensitive agricultural trade. The CEFTA treaty was expanded to the Balkans after 1995 and has been and is still a good example for countries that do not want to stay in an ex-Soviet or ex-Yugoslav economic integration but is a good method for them to prepare for the earliest possible EU membership.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
|
*** (2019) Can CEFTA Membership Be a Lifeboat for Georgia and Ukraine in the Illiberal World Order?. February 2019, https://gagrainstitute.org/cefta-euenlargement-safeboat-for-georgia-and-ukraine
|
|
|
*** IMF Country Database. https://www.imf.org/en/Countries
|
|
|
*** Az Antall-kormány programja 1990. Az Antall-kormány külpolitikai programja. https://www.parlament.hu/naplo34/005/0050004.html
|
|
|
András, B., Szita, J. (1984) Economic Cooperation of Socialist Countries in the Framework of the CMEA. MKKE, Textbook Publisher, 64-64
|
|
|
Antonis, A., Kosma, T.S., McHug, J. (2003) Trade-Liberalization Strategies: What Could Southeastern Europe Learn from the CEFTA and BFTA?. IMF Studies, 03/239: 1-32
|
|
|
Berend, I.T., Ránky, G. (1976) Közép-Kelet Európa gazdasági fejlődése a 19-20. században. Budapest: KJK
|
|
|
Bod, P.Á. (2019) A magyar gazdaságpolitika 1989 és 2019 között. Budapest: Gazdaság és Pénzügy, March 6, 2019, 16-38
|
|
|
Domonkos, E. (2017) Közép-és Kelet-Európa gazdaságtörténete a két világháború között. Budapest: Aposztróf Kiadó, 388-388
|
|
|
Domonkos, E. (2017) Közép-és Kelet-Európa gazdaságtörténete 1945-1953 között. Budapest: Aposztróf Kiadó, 268-268
|
|
|
Domonkos, E. (2019) Közép-és Kelet-Európa gazdaságtörténete 1953 és 1989 között. Budapest: Aposztróf Kiadó, 164-164
|
|
|
Farkas, B. (2017) Piacgazdaságok az Európai Unióban. Akadémiai Kiadó, 368-368
|
|
|
Gagrain Institute Can CEFTA Membership Be Lifeboat for Georgia and Ukraine in the Illiberal World Order?: 39 EU 15 covers EU Member States Between 1995 and 2004
|
|
|
Gerőcs, T., Pinkasz, A. (2018) Conflicting Interest in the COMECON Integration East Central Europe. Leiden, 336-365
|
|
|
Gray, G. (1995) Poland: European Tiger. Euromoney Publications, 205-205
|
|
|
Jeszenszky, G. (2016) An Attempt to Remedy the Trianon Trauma. Osiris, 394-394
|
|
|
Kolodko, G.W. (2000) A posztszocialista átalakulás tíz éve-a gazdaságpolitikai reformokkal kapcsolatos tanulságok. Budapest: Közgazdasági Szemle, 197-214
|
|
|
Köves, A. (2003) A KGST-kereskedelemtől az EU-csatlakozásig. Budapest: Közgazdasági Szemle, July-August 2003, 635-653
|
|
|
Mostetschnig, A.M. (2011) The CEFTA and the Single Market. Natolin: College of Europe, 87-87
|
|
|
Réti, T. (2000) A kelet-közép-európai kereskedelem. Budapest: Közgazdasági Szemle, January 2000, 64-80
|
|
|
Rosati, D. (2005) New Europe: Report on Transformation. Krynica: Economic Forum, 378-378
|
|
|
Siljak, D. (2019) Challenges and Opportunities for the CEFTA Countries. Budapest: Institute of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Economics of Hungary, 11-14
|
|
|
Zoltán, P. (2016) Magyarország politikai gazdaságtana. Budapest: Osiris Kiadó, 258-258
|
|
|
|
|