IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mje/mjejnl/v3y2007i6p131-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should Re-Industrialisation Represent The Final Stageof Transition The Case Study Of Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Sofija Adzic

Abstract

The initial thesis in this paper is the basic condition for completion of (economic) transition in Serbia through incapacitating of enterprises for business activities within the Internal European Union Market. The second thesis is that the solution of this problem is based on the paradigm of reindustrialisation in the context of: (1) enhancement of all forms of management, in particular in the field of export clusters, business networks and alliances and sector of production of public goods and services of public administration. (2) observing of principles of participation and consensus of economic and social partners, and (3) precise and transparent professionalisation and decentralisation of functions of public regulation of economy and economic development. The third thesis is that for realisation of the project of reindustrialisation it is necessary to create conditions for constituting of good business environment in the function of stimulation of (private) production investments into exporting industries. The fourth one is that the development of good business environment depends much more on internal factors than on the external surroundings. In accordance with the above, the appropriate solutions for constituting of good business environment in the function of reindustrialisation of Serbia should be looked for in: (1) the development of stimulative market and institutional environment for the development and more complete employment of available economic, technological and human potentials with the optimum allocation of production factors and development based on cooperation of all stakeholders of modern industry, supplemented with harmonised and efficient public regulation of economy and economic development, and (2) intensification of structural changes in market, technological, organisational and cost performances of agricultural estates, industrial enterprises, business activities and complexes.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofija Adzic, 2007. "Should Re-Industrialisation Represent The Final Stageof Transition The Case Study Of Serbia," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 3(6), pages 131-145.
  • Handle: RePEc:mje:mjejnl:v:3:y:2007:i:6:p:131-145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.mnje.com/mje/2007/v03-n06/mje_2007_v03-n06-a16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://repec.mnje.com/mje/2007/v03-n06/mje_2007_v03-n06-a16.html
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gérard Roland, 2004. "Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets, and Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026268148x, December.
    2. Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), 2006. "International Handbook on Industrial Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3451, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sofija Adzic, 2009. "Local Policy For Neutralization Of Conflictsin The Project Of Development Of Public-Private Partnership," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 5(9), pages 51-62.

    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. Martin Petrick & Dauren Oshakbayev & Regina Taitukova & Nodir Djanibekov, 2017. "The return of the regulator: Kazakhstan’s cotton sector reforms since independence," Central Asian Survey, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 430-452, October.
    2. Eicher, Theo S. & Schreiber, Till, 2010. "Structural policies and growth: Time series evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 169-179, January.
    3. Rode, Martin & Gwartney, James D., 2012. "Does democratization facilitate economic liberalization?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 607-619.
    4. Lamo, Ana & Messina, Julián & Wasmer, Etienne, 2011. "Are specific skills an obstacle to labor market adjustment?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 240-256, April.
    5. Simeon Djankov & Edward Miguel & Yingyi Qian & Gérard Roland & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2005. "Who are Russia's Entrepreneurs?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 587-597, 04/05.
    6. Pavel Ciaian & Ján Pokrivčák & Dušan Drabik, 2008. "Prečo sú niektoré sektory v tranzitívnych ekonomikách menej reformované ako ostatné? prípad výskumu a vzdelávania v oblasti ekonómie [Why some sectors of transition economies are less reformed than," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2008(6), pages 819-836.
    7. Gersbach, Hans & Jackson, Matthew O. & Muller, Philippe & Tejada, Oriol, 2023. "Electoral competition with costly policy changes: A dynamic perspective," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    8. Masten, Arjana Brezigar & Coricelli, Fabrizio & Masten, Igor, 2008. "Non-linear growth effects of financial development: Does financial integration matter?," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 295-313, March.
    9. Grzegorz W. Kolodko, 2009. "A Two-thirds Rate of Success: Polish Transformation and Economic Development, 1989-2008," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2009-14, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. repec:wvu:wpaper:06-03 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. DELL'ANNO, Roberto & VILLA, Stefania, 2012. "Growth in Transition Countries: Big Bang versus Gradualism," CELPE Discussion Papers 122, CELPE - CEnter for Labor and Political Economics, University of Salerno, Italy.
    12. Grigoriadis, Theocharis, 2017. "Religion, administration & public goods: Experimental evidence from Russia," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 42-60.
    13. Zheng, Guo & Barbieri, Elisa & Di Tommaso, Marco R. & Zhang, Lei, 2016. "Development zones and local economic growth: zooming in on the Chinese case," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 238-249.
    14. Grajzl, Peter & Baniak, Andrzej, 2018. "Private enforcement, corruption, and antitrust design," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 284-307.
    15. Mübariz Hasanov & Tolga Omay, 2011. "The Relationship Between Inflation, Output Growth, and Their Uncertainties: Evidence from Selected CEE Countries," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(0), pages 5-20, July.
    16. Campos, Nauro F & Giovannoni, Francesco, 2006. "The Determinants of Asset Stripping: Theory and Evidence from the Transition Economies," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 681-706, October.
    17. Kryeziu Liridon & Coşkun Recai, 2018. "Political and Economic Institutions and Economic Performance: Evidence from Kosovo," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 84-99, December.
    18. Mark Gradstein & Branko Milanovic, 2004. "Does Libertè = Egalité? A Survey of the Empirical Links between Democracy and Inequality with Some Evidence on the Transition Economies," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 515-537, September.
    19. Nandini Gupta & John C. Ham & Jan Svejnar, 2000. "Priorities and Sequencing in Privatization: Theory and Evidence from the Czech Republic," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 323, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    20. repec:zbw:iamodp:163932 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Johan F. M. Swinnen & Liesbeth Dries & Karen Macours, 2005. "Transition and agricultural labor," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 15-34, January.
    22. Ethan Ligon & Laura Schechter, 2003. "Measuring Vulnerability," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(486), pages 95-102, March.

    More about this item

    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:mje:mjejnl:v:3:y:2007:i:6:p:131-145. 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: Nikola Draskovic Jelcic (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.mnje.com .

    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.