IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwkie/823.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Die wirtschaftliche Lage Rußlands: Fortsetzung des Niedergangs ohne hinreichenden Strukturwandel. Fünfter Bericht

Author

Listed:
  • Buch, Claudia M.
  • Eckel, Carsten
  • Koop, Michael J.
  • Laaser, Claus-Friedrich
  • Lücke, Matthias
  • Schäfer, Clarissa
  • Schrader, Klaus
  • Engerer, Hella
  • Schrettl, Wolfram
  • Schrooten, Mechthild
  • Weißenburger, Ulrich
  • Gabrisch, Hubert
  • Sigmund, Peter
  • Werner, Klaus

Abstract

Der Bundesminister für Wirtschaft hat mit Schreiben vom 21. Dezember 1993 das Deutsche Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung Berlin, das Institut für Weltwirtschaft an der Universität Kiel und das Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung Halle damit beauftragt, das 1992 begonnene Forschungsvorhaben mit dem Titel „Die wirtschaftliche Situation Rußlands und Weißrußlands — wirtschaftliches Potential und mögliche Entwicklungslinien" fortzuführen. Die beteiligten Institute haben nunmehr ihren fünften Bericht über die Wirtschaft Rußlands fertiggestellt. Der Bericht ist in zwei Teile gegliedert. Im ersten Teil wird der aktuelle Stand der Wirtschaftsentwicklung und der Reformpolitik dargestellt. Die wirtschaftliche Lage in der Russischen Föderation ließ auch nach Fertigstellung des letzten Berichts kaum Anzeichen einer Wende zum Besseren erkennen, statt dessen hat sich der wirtschaftliche Niedergang fortgesetzt, und es gibt Anzeichen für eine Verschärfung der Krise. Der zweite Teil des Berichts beschäftigt sich schwerpunktmäßig mit der realwirtschaftlichen Anpassung. Die Anpassungsprozesse werden aus sektoraler, regionaler und eigentumsrechtlicher Perspektive analysiert; aus Unternehmersicht werden Anpassungen bei der Beschäftigung, der Finanzierung, der Lagerhaltung und der Preissetzung untersucht. Nach wie vor werden die Analysen durch den institutionellen Umbruch und das unzuverlässige und inkonsistente statistische Berichtssystem, dessen Qualität sich im Zeitablauf abermals verschlechtert hat, erschwert. Vor allem die Arbeitsmarkt- und die Finanzstatistiken sind lückenhaft und zum Teil widersprüchlich. Transaktionen mit dem Ausland und die Aktivitäten des sich neu entwickelnden Privatsektors werden statistisch nur unzureichend erfaßt. Informationslücken konnten nur teilweise durch Befragung staatlicher Stellen und russischer Wissenschaftler vor Ort geschlossen werden, so daß erhebliche Unsicherheiten über den tatsächlichen Verlauf des Transformationsprozesses verbleiben.

Suggested Citation

  • Buch, Claudia M. & Eckel, Carsten & Koop, Michael J. & Laaser, Claus-Friedrich & Lücke, Matthias & Schäfer, Clarissa & Schrader, Klaus & Engerer, Hella & Schrettl, Wolfram & Schrooten, Mechthild & Wei, 1994. "Die wirtschaftliche Lage Rußlands: Fortsetzung des Niedergangs ohne hinreichenden Strukturwandel. Fünfter Bericht," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 823, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkie:823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/823/1/171749286.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung & Berlin / Institut für Weltwirtschaft an der Universität Kiel / Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung Halle, 1992. "Die wirtschaftliche Lage Rußlands und Weißrußlands - Systemtransformation am Scheideweg: erster Bericht," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 59(42), pages 521-548.
    2. Boycko, Maxim & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1997. "Privatizing Russia," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262522284, April.
    3. Kaminski, Bartlomiej & Yeats, Alexander, 1993. "OECD trade barriers faced by the successor states of the Soviet Union," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1175, The World Bank.
    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. J. David Brown & John S. Earle, 2002. "Job Reallocation and Productivity Growth under Alternative Economic Systems and Policies: Evidence from the Soviet Transition," CERT Discussion Papers 0208, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    2. John McMillan, 2003. "Market Design: The Policy Uses of Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 139-144, May.
    3. Lu, Susan Feng & Dranove, David, 2013. "Profiting from gaizhi: Management buyouts during China’s privatization," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 634-650.
    4. Barberis, Nicholas & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1996. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 764-790, August.
    5. La Porta, Rafael & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1997. "Legal Determinants of External Finance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(3), pages 1131-1150, July.
    6. Ciprian Stan & Mike Peng & Garry Bruton, 2014. "Slack and the performance of state-owned enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 473-495, June.
    7. Clarke, George R. G. & Cull, Robert, 1999. "Provincial bank privatization in Argentina : the why, how, and"so what"?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2159, The World Bank.
    8. Alexei Izyumov & Leonid Kosals & Rosalina Ryvkina, 2000. "Privatisation of the Russian Defence Industry: Ownership and Control Issues," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 485-496.
    9. Loren Brandt & Hongbin Li & Joanne Roberts, 2001. "Why do Governments Privatize," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 429, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    10. Anders Aslund, 2005. "Comparative Oligarchy: Russia, Ukraine and the United States," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0296, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    11. Brown, J David & Earle, John, 2001. "Privatization, Competition and Reform Strategies: Theory and Evidence from Russian Enterprise Panel Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 2758, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Gerard Roland, 2018. "The evolution of post‐communist systems : Eastern Europe vs. China," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 26(4), pages 589-614, October.
    13. Irina Denisova & Markus Eller & Timothy Frye & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2007. "Who Wants to Revise Privatization and Why? Evidence from 28 Post-Communist Countries," Working Papers w0105, New Economic School (NES).
    14. Aaron Tornell, 1999. "Privatizing the Privatized," NBER Working Papers 7206, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. J. David Brown & John Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2005. "Does Privatization Hurt Workers? Lessons from Comprehensive Manufacturing Firm Panel Data in Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine," CERT Discussion Papers 0509, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    16. Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2003. "The Rise of the Regulatory State," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 401-425, June.
    17. Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "State versus Private Ownership," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 133-150, Fall.
    18. Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward & La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The new comparative economics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 595-619, December.
    19. Susanto Basu & David Li, 2000. "A Theory of the Reform of Bureaucratic Institutions," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1271, Econometric Society.
    20. Paul L. Joskow & Richard Schmalensee & Natalia Tsukanova, 1994. "Competition Policy in Russia during and after Privatization," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 301-381.

    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:zbw:ifwkie:823. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.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.