Search

Search Results

• Reflections on the Role of Institutions on the Chinese Road to a Market Economy

  49-82

  Laszlo Csaba

  Views:

  101

  At the onset of transformation there has been a close to consensus view that the market system has no alternative. While this insight has found its place in the current mainstream on development economics, the so-called Washington consensus or post-Washington consensus (Kolodko, 2000, pp.119-141 andpp. 348-356; and Williamson, J, 2000, Srinivasan, T.N.,2000), very few would venture to repeat in an academic writing the once famous dictum of Vaclav Klaus: the third road leads to the third world. Much of western Europe has remained within the framework of the welfare state, despite its obvious limitations. Also in
  the transforming economies, the rollback of the state has proven to be much less than the tough normative language adopted by early reformers would have indicated. Actually, it is the structure rather than the size of public spending in these countries that may be a source of social and economic strains by providing less than optimal conditions for sustaining economic growth.

• The Relevance of the Washington Consensus for the Post-communist Countries

  5-25

  Peter Mihalyi

  Views:

  217

  The Washington Consensus (WC) is 20 years old now. With hindsight, its main significance is the unification of the normative economics. Prior to the WC, it was widely accepted that different policies should be pursued in the developed and in the underdeveloped economies. It was a sheer coincidence that the emergence of WC occurred a few months before the collapse of the communist systems of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Many scholars believe that the WC is responsible for the recurring economic crisis of the last two decades. I reject this view. A 200-year track record confirms that depressions and financial crisis have been always the intrinsic components of market economies – for the reasons identified by Marx and Schumpeter long time ago.

  Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) classification: F02, F23, F41, P11, P36