Imposed institutions and preferences for redistribution

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-156
Author(s):  
ALBERTO CHONG ◽  
MARK GRADSTEIN
Keyword(s):  
State Ownership ◽  
Capitalist Country ◽  
Limited Effect ◽  
Baltic Countries ◽  
Preferences For Redistribution ◽  
Communist Countries

AbstractTo what extent do imposed institutions shape preferences? We consider this issue by comparing the market-versus-state attitudes of respondents from a capitalist country, Finland, and from an ex-communist group of Baltic countries, and by arguing that the period of communist rule can be viewed as an ‘experiment’ in institutional imposition. We find that, consistent with some earlier related work, citizens from ex-communist countries tend to be more supportive of state ownership than respondents from capitalist economies. However, they also favour increasing inequality and competition as the means to enhance incentives. We conclude that, in some important relevant dimensions, institutional imposition (which lasted for about 50 years) had a limited effect on preferences.

scholarly journals Privatisation or State Ownership When Labour Market is Unionised?

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-36
Author(s):  
Luciano Fanti ◽  
Domenico Buccella
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Labour Market ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Unexpected Result ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Public Firm ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Communist Countries

AbstractThis paper analyses the choice of the bargaining agenda in a public/private unionised monopoly, and investigates whether the traditional higher efficiency of the state ownership of a monopoly holds when the labour market is unionised. First, we find that both a private and public monopoly always adopts a Right-to-Manage agenda. Second, a public firm pays a higher wage. Third, we show that privatisation could ensure a higher social welfare. This rather unexpected result may emerge provided that the Government has a high evaluation of the workers’ welfare, and the union is strong and/or wage aggressive. Therefore, our results suggest that privatisation 1) should be socially preferred depending only on the strength and wage aggressiveness of unions, and 2) rather paradoxically, is preferred when the Government is more careful about workers’ welfare. Our results may have policy implications especially in the post-communist countries, where the debate on privatisation is ubiquitously high and, differently between various countries, Government and unions may oscillate between left- or right-wing, and strength or weakness, respectively.

Плинність партійних систему посткомуністичних країнах (1992−2019)

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-95
Author(s):  
Witalij Lebediuk
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Party System ◽  
Party Systems ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
Baltic Countries ◽  
The Baltic ◽  
Communist Countries

The paper offers a thorough analysis of the main types of party systems and their changes in the post-Soviet countries between 1992 and 2019. The evolution of the main criteria concerning the party systems classification has been analyzed. We use a database of all parliamentary elections which took place in the post-communist countries since 1992. This article concludes that the majority of party systems of the post-Soviet countries are not stable and suffering permanent changes. On this basis, 16 party systems that continue to exist in the post-communist countries from 1992 to 2019 are almost half-assigned to the predominant party types. Our findings indicate that Kyrgyzstan and Moldova have moved from a predominant party type to a multiparty type. Russia, Armenia, and Ukraine have changed their party systems from a multiparty type to a predominant party type. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan remain in the predominant party system since the first elections. Slovakia, the Czech Republic and the Baltic countries have remained in the multiparty types since the first elections.

Syed Nawab Haider Naqvi, Mahmood Hasan Khan and M. Ghaffu Otaudhry (edt.). LaJld Reforms in Pakistan, A Historical Perspective. Islamabad: Pakistan Institute of Development Economics 1987. viii+216 pp.Price: Rs 220 (USS 35) for hardcover; Rs 140.00 (USS 20) for soft-cover.

1988 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-218
Author(s):  
Luther Tweeten
Keyword(s):  
Land Tenure ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
Land Reforms ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Rural Pakistan ◽  
The Status ◽  
Land Tenure System ◽  
Ownership Of Land ◽  
High Degree

The authors describe how Pakistan has grappled with land reform, surely one of the most intractable and divisive issues facing agriculture anywhere. The land-tenure system at independence in 1947 included a high degree of land ownership concentration, absentee landlordism, insecurity of tenant tenure, and excessive rent. Land reform since 1947 focused on imposition of ceilings on landholding, distribution of land to landless tenants and small owners, and readjustments of contracts to improve the position of the tenant. These reformist measures have removed some but by no means all of the undesirable characteristics of the system. The authors list as well as present a critique of the reports of five official committees and commissions on land reform. The reports highlight the conflicts and ideologies of the reformers. The predominant ideal of the land reformers is a system of peasant proprietorship although some reformers favoured other systems such as communal farming and state ownership of land, and still others favoured cash rents over share rents. More pragmatic reformers recognized that tenancy is likely to be with Pakistan for the foreseeable future and that the batai (sharecropping) arrangement is the most workable system. According to the editors, the batai system can work to the advantage of landlord and tenant if the ceilings on landholding can be sufficiently lowered (and enforced), the security of the tenant is ensured, and the tenant has recourse to the courts for adjudication of disputes with landlords. Many policy-makers in Pakistan have come to accept that position but intervention by the State to realize the ideal has been slow. The editors conclude that" ... the end result of these land reforms is that they have not succeeded in significantly changing the status quo in rural Pakistan" (p. 29).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document