Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Kristen Ghodsee ◽  
Mitchell A. Orenstein

The introduction of this book frames the transition from state socialism to market capitalism that began in Eastern Europe and Central Asia in 1989 as a story of “winners” and “losers.” Ghodsee and Orenstein grapple with the different viewpoints held by scholars and policymakers, some of whom view transition as a qualified success, and some who view it as a socioeconomic catastrophe. Ghodsee and Orenstein introduce the interdisciplinary approach that the book will take, touching upon research methodology in economics, demography, public opinion, and ethnography. The introduction also provides an account of changes in academic and institutional discourse over time, explaining the initial perspectives of transition and showing where theories were proven correct, and where they failed, over the course of the thirty-year transition. It proposes a new perspective to understand transition, one of extreme social and economic inequality, that captures the experiences of both the “winners” and the “losers” of transition.

2021 ◽  
pp. 114-121
Author(s):  
Kristen Ghodsee ◽  
Mitchell A. Orenstein

Chapter 10 analyzes public opinion data to identify individuals who were more and less likely to support transitional reforms. In the mid-1990s, significant numbers of disaffected Russians indicated a preference for the old Soviet regime when compared to the current regime or a Western democracy, which suggests evidence for a phenomenon termed “red nostalgia.” Public opinion data also suggest that market capitalism is more popular in Central and Eastern Europe, but that many of those who expressed support for reform did it out of self-interest. The beneficiaries of transition—mostly the wealthy, young, educated, urban, and men—were more likely to support markets and democracy than their demographic counterparts. The chapter shows that across the postsocialist world, differences in support for reform are indicative of widespread belief that transition was being led from above, and that political and economic reforms were being imposed on the socialist masses by liberal elites.


2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olusoji Adeyi ◽  
Enis Baris ◽  
Sarbani Chakraborty ◽  
Thomas Novotny ◽  
Ross Pavis
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries

This chapter introduces a benchmark theory of public opinion towards European integration. Rather than relying on generic labels like support or scepticism, the chapter suggests that public opinion towards the EU is both multidimensional and multilevel in nature. People’s attitudes towards Europe are essentially based on a comparison between the benefits of the status quo of membership and those associated with an alternative state, namely one’s country being outside the EU. This comparison is coined the ‘EU differential’. When comparing these benefits, people rely on both their evaluations of the outcomes (policy evaluations) and the system that produces them (regime evaluations). This chapter presents a fine-grained conceptualization of what it means to be an EU supporter or Eurosceptic; it also designs a careful empirical measurement strategy to capture variation, both cross-nationally and over time. The chapter cross-validates these measures against a variety of existing and newly developed data sources.


1998 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Whitley ◽  
Laszlo Czaban

The collapse of state socialism in Eastern Europe has transformed many of the institutions governing state enterprises and was expected to lead to radical changes in enterprise structures and practices. This was especially so where ownership had changed. However, just as new constitutions do not create liberal democracies overnight, so too the withdrawal of the state from direct control over the economy and privatization does not automatically generate dramatic enterprise transformations. This study of 27 Hungarian enterprises in the early 1990s shows that products and the markets served changed remarkably little, and the employment and organizational changes that have taken place in most enterprises have been less radical than might be expected. Ownership changes have not always led to major shifts in control, nor have private owners implemented sharply different policies from state controllers. The highly fluid institutional environment limited the commitment to, and capacity for, major strategic changes in most substantial Hungarian enterprises. Where changes have occurred, they have been most significant in: (a) state enterprises that are in severe financial difficulties, and (b) companies controlled by foreign firms.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 808-815
Author(s):  
Rafael Obregon ◽  
Mario Mosquera ◽  
Sergiu Tomsa ◽  
Ketan Chitnis

Author(s):  
Emma Taylor ◽  
Victor Del Rio Vilas ◽  
Terence Scott ◽  
Andre Coetzer ◽  
Joaquin M. Prada ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document