MARKET AS "THE INVISIBLE HAND" OR STATE INTERVENTIONISM AS "THE VISIBLE HAND" OF ECONOMIC POLICY

Authors

  • Simo Stevanovi?, PhD Faculty of Agriculture, Belgrade
  • Milutin ?orovi?, PhD Faculty of Agriculture, Belgrade
  • Milan Milanovi?, PhD Megatrend University, Belgrade

Keywords:

market, state interventionism, results of transition, Serbia, CJE

Abstract

This paper presents two mutually opposed aspects of the market as a regulatory mechanism in the economy. From the aspect of entrepreneurship, the free operation of "invisible hand" encourage the successful, but limits and neutralizes unsuccessful, and from the aspect of social equality, through the market, legally deepens the gap between rich and poor. It was pointed out that the resolution of decades of controversy of the market as a regulatory mechanism leads to the balanced operation of markets and social equality criteria, which is the one of the characteristics of models of economic systems of developed countries in Europe and the EU. As a way to resolve market controversies, transition countries have adopted the model of "reformed welfare society". The results of transition in Central and Southeastern European countries are different and depending on the closeness of their model of a market economy with developed European countries. The economic effects of the transition were monitored in two groups of countries that became full members and third, those which have not yet. Countries from the first and second group that have became full members of the EU in 2004, according to selected indicators, in 2003 reached or surpassed the pre-transition level of development. From the third group of countries that have not yet joined the EU, Croatia has the best value for most indicators. Measured by purchasing power parity Croatia reached 50% of GDP in EU-25. Unfortunately, analyzed indicators were much lower in Serbia. The value of GDP reached only 30% of the EU-25, and FDI/capita 1119 euros, especially so called "Green field" investments, are at the level of 24.4% of Croats. Analyzed indicators in the third group of countries are well below that level.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Бајец, Ј., Јоксимовић Љубинка (2005): Савремени привредни системи, Економски факултет, Београд.
2. Bogomolov, O. (ed.el.al.) (2001), Post Socialist Countries in the Globalising World, Russian Academy of Science, Institute for International Economic and Political Studies, Moskva.
3. Document of the World Bank, Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study, June, 2000.
4. Дружић, Г. (2005): Нужност заокрета економске политике из процесијске у развојну, Економија/Ецономицс, 12, (1), 1-35.
5. Gligorov, V., Richter S. et al. (2007): «High Growth Continues, with Risks of Overheating on the Horizon», WIIW Research Reports, 341 (Special Issue on Economic Prospects for Central, East and Southeast Europe).
6. Крачун, Д. (2005): Транзиција, стабилизација и економски раст и искуство Словеније, Економски преглед, 56(3-4), 145-162.
7. Месарић, М. (2002): Нобеловац Joseph Stiglitz: Критика "Тржишног фундаментализма", глобализације и политике Међународног монетарног фонда, Економски преглед, 53 (11-12) 1151-1182.
8. Павловић, В. (2005): Значај процене вредности капитала за приватизацију предузећа, Факултет за пословне студије, Београд (докторска дисертација)
9. Павловић, В. (2006): Осврт на циљеве приватизације, Пословна политика, 35(10), 20-25.
10. Podkaminer, L., Hunya G., et al. (2005): "Back from the Peak, Growth in Transition Countries Returns to Standard Rate of Catching-up", Research Report, No. 320, p. 2-44.
11. Stevanović, S., Đorović, M., Milanović, M. (2007): Contraversies of the Transition in Serbia and the Countries of East Europe, Thematic Proceedings "Development of Agriculture and Rural Areas, in Central and Eastern Europe", Novi Sad, EAAE, Serbian Association of Agricultural Economists, Belgrade, pp. 169-176.
12. Стевановић, С., Ђоровић, М., Милановић, М. (2009): Узајамност нивоа привредне развијености и резултата транзиције, Економика пољопривреде, 56(4), 551-563.
13. Стевановић, С., Ђоровић, М., Милановић, М. (2010): Светска финансијска криза и њене последице на привреду Србије, Економика пољопривреде, 57(3), 353-368.
14. Веселица, В., Војнић, Д. (2007): Quo vadis Croatia? Политика, економска политика и економска знаност, Економски преглед, 58(12), 899-940.
15. Војнић, Д. (2001): Контроверзе тржишта у свјетлу друштвених догађања протеклога стољећа, Економски преглед, 52(5-6), 487-515.
16. Војнић, Д. (2004): Тржиште, проклетство или спасење, Економски преглед, 55(9-10), 681-726.
17. Војнић, Д. (2005): Дубоко коријење проблема који прожимају Хрватско господарство и друштво, Економија/Ецономицс, 12 (2), 421-440.

Downloads

Published

2011-09-30

How to Cite

Stevanović, S., Đorović, M., & Milanović, M. (2011). MARKET AS "THE INVISIBLE HAND" OR STATE INTERVENTIONISM AS "THE VISIBLE HAND" OF ECONOMIC POLICY. Ekonomika Poljoprivrede, 58(3), 371–386. Retrieved from https://ea.bg.ac.rs/index.php/EA/article/view/715

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2