IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/v26y2024i65p312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the Level of Performance of Country’s Cultural Economics: The Case of EU11

Author

Listed:
  • Kristina Astike

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Viktorija Skvarciany

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

Culture itself forms society’s identity, social values, and formal and informal social relations. This strengthens social capital, which is based on community, citizenship, volunteerism, and social values. These aspects promote effective democratic governance, and thereby ensure economic growth and, at the same time, the expansion of cultural economics. The main purpose of this article is to identify which of the selected cultural performance factors are more important in relation to each other and to create an index of cultural economics for the post-communist Central and Eastern European countries of the European Union according to these factors. The methods used in the article are as follows: analysis of scientific literature, qualitative expert interviews process with FAHP, and multi-criteria decision-making method TOPSIS. Two types of data were collected and analysed in the article: data received from the expert survey and existing statistical data. The results revealed that after creating an index of the post-communist Central and Eastern Europe countries of the European Union according to selected cultural performance factors, the first five places are occupied by Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The practical implications of the research are that cultural economics is related to both the private and public sectors and, as a result, to their revenue; hence, the products it produces may be stated to contribute to the country’s economy and development. The limitations of this study are statistics that have been used; the data is for 2020 as this is the most recent available.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristina Astike & Viktorija Skvarciany, 2024. "Measuring the Level of Performance of Country’s Cultural Economics: The Case of EU11," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 26(65), pages 312-312, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:26:y:2024:i:65:p:312
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_3295.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dinulescu Ruxandra & Dobrin Cosmin, 2022. "Applying the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process for classifying and prioritizing healthcare quality attributes," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 15-40, March.
    2. Roberta Capello, 2018. "Cohesion Policies and the Creation of a European Identity: The Role of Territorial Identity," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 489-503, April.
    3. Xabier Barandiaran-Irastorza & Simón Peña-Fernández & Alfonso Unceta-Satrústegui, 2020. "The Archipelago of Cultural and Creative Industries: A Case Study of the Basque Country," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Ilan Chabay, 2020. "Vision, identity, and collective behavior change on pathways to sustainable futures," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 151-165, January.
    5. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica & Antomil-Ibias, José, 2014. "Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Krzysztof Dmytrow & Beata Bieszk-Stolorz, 2021. "Comparison of changes in the labour markets of post-communist countries with other EU member states," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 16(4), pages 741-764, December.
    7. Sara Grenni & L. G. Horlings & K. Soini, 2020. "Linking spatial planning and place branding strategies through cultural narratives in places," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(7), pages 1355-1374, July.
    8. Azeem, Muhammad & Ahmed, Munir & Haider, Sajid & Sajjad, Muhammad, 2021. "Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    9. Roberto Cellini & Tiziana Cuccia, 2021. "Female workforce participation and household expenditure for culture and recreation: macroeconomic evidence from the Italian regions," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(14), pages 1659-1671, March.
    10. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Muhammad Azeem Akbar & Arif Ali Khan & Zhiqiu Huang, 2023. "Multicriteria decision making taxonomy of code recommendation system challenges: a fuzzy-AHP analysis," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 115-131, June.
    2. Marko J Djapan & Danijela P Tadic & Ivan D Macuzic & Predrag Dj Dragojovic, 2015. "A new fuzzy model for determining risk level on the workplaces in manufacturing small and medium enterprises," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 229(5), pages 456-468, October.
    3. Benyou Jia & Slobodan P. Simonovic & Pingan Zhong & Zhongbo Yu, 2016. "A Multi-Objective Best Compromise Decision Model for Real-Time Flood Mitigation Operations of Multi-Reservoir System," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(10), pages 3363-3387, August.
    4. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2023. "Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process for Strategic Decision Making in Electric Vehicle Adoption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Orlando Durán & Paulo Andrés Durán, 2018. "Activity Based Costing for Wastewater Treatment and Reuse under Uncertainty: A Fuzzy Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin, 2020. "Prospective assessment of methanol vehicles in China using FANP-SWOT analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 60-75.
    7. Shubham Gupta & Raghav Khanna & Pranay Kohli & Sarthak Agnihotri & Umang Soni & M. Asjad, 2023. "Risk evaluation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure using Fuzzy AHP – a case study in India," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 245-258, March.
    8. Juan Carlos Martín & Veronika Rudchenko & María-Victoria Sánchez-Rebull, 2020. "The Role of Nationality and Hotel Class on Guests’ Satisfaction. A Fuzzy-TOPSIS Approach Applied in Saint Petersburg," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, September.
    9. Jelena Lukić & Mirjana Misita & Dragan D. Milanović & Ankica Borota-Tišma & Aleksandra Janković, 2022. "Determining the Risk Level in Client Analysis by Applying Fuzzy Logic in Insurance Sector," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Sharma, Mahak & Antony, Rose & Sehrawat, Rajat & Cruz, Angel Contreras & Daim, Tugrul U., 2022. "Exploring post-adoption behaviors of e-service users: Evidence from the hospitality sector /online travel services," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Tanrıverdi, Gökhan & Lezki, Şenay, 2021. "Istanbul Airport (IGA) and quest of best competitive strategy for air cargo carriers in new competition environment: A fuzzy multi-criteria approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    12. Hossain, Niamat Ullah Ibne & Jaradat, Raed & Hosseini, Seyedmohsen & Marufuzzaman, Mohammad & Buchanan, Randy K., 2019. "A framework for modeling and assessing system resilience using a Bayesian network: A case study of an interdependent electrical infrastructure system," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 62-83.
    13. Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič, 2023. "Comparative Sensitivity Analysis of Some Fuzzy AHP Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-41, December.
    14. John R. Moodie & Viktor Salenius & Michael Kull, 2022. "From impact assessments towards proactive citizen engagement in EU cohesion policy," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 1113-1132, October.
    15. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    16. Tin-Chih Toly Chen & Yu-Cheng Wang & Yu-Cheng Lin & Hsin-Chieh Wu & Hai-Fen Lin, 2019. "A Fuzzy Collaborative Approach for Evaluating the Suitability of a Smart Health Practice," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Jennifer Helgeson & Cheyney O’Fallon, 2021. "Resilience Dividends and Resilience Windfalls: Narratives That Tie Disaster Resilience Co-Benefits to Long-Term Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-27, April.
    18. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Shoeib Faraji Abdolmaleki & Danial Esfandiary Abdolmaleki & Pastora M. Bello Bugallo, 2023. "Finding Sustainable Countries in Renewable Energy Sector: A Case Study for an EU Energy System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-22, June.
    20. Chia-Nan Wang & Ngoc-Ai-Thy Nguyen & Thanh-Tuan Dang & Chen-Ming Lu, 2021. "A Compromised Decision-Making Approach to Third-Party Logistics Selection in Sustainable Supply Chain Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy VIKOR Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-27, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cultural economics; heritage; cultural institutions; EU11;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D1 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior
    • H1 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:26:y:2024:i:65:p:312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.