Pokaż uproszczony rekord

dc.contributor.authorKamyshnykova, Evelina
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-30T13:28:00Z
dc.date.available2024-09-30T13:28:00Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-30
dc.identifier.issn1508-2008
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/53267
dc.description.abstractThis study provides a comparative analysis of the economic growth paths of Ukraine and Poland from a growth‑model perspective and determines how to calibrate Ukraine’s growth model to converge with Poland’s booming economy. The methodology comprises an approach to operationalizing growth models for GDP growth decomposition into “import‑adjusted” demand components, drawing on national input‑output data from 2000 to 2019. I found that from 2000 to 2003, both European economies relied on a combination of exports and domestic consumption. Expanded trade integration and an FDI boost after Poland joined the EU in 2004 spurred the Polish growth model’s shift to a distinctively export‑led, FDI‑driven strategy with accelerated GDP growth rates. In Ukraine, in the wake of the great financial crisis, I identified a transition to a consumption‑led growth model that, along with a declining investment component of aggregate demand, led to fading growth rates. An analysis of sectoral contributions to GDP growth revealed that avoiding deindustrialization in Poland underpinned the country’s export‑led strategy, unlike Ukraine, which underwent a key sectoral shift from manufacturing to a commodities‑based orientation after 2008. Both these economies demonstrated a high level of integration into global value chains, focusing on labor‑intensive manufacturing and services, but Poland has outperformed Ukraine in terms of share of high value‑added exports, which increased after EU accession. Following the Polish pattern, I propose that Ukraine’s growth model should activate the FDI driver of economic growth, upgrading the export structure and moving up value chains to unlock the country’s growth opportunities. The study represents the first comparison of Ukraine’s and Poland’s economic growth paths that traces the changes in dominant final demand components and macro‑sectors in the two countries’ economic growth profiles. This paper contributes to the comparative political economy literature on the growth models of peripheral economies, providing insights that can inform policies for growth model transformation.en
dc.description.abstractNiniejsze opracowanie prezentuje analizę porównawczą ścieżek wzrostu gospodarczego Ukrainy i Polski z perspektywy modelu wzrostu i określa, w jaki sposób należy skalibrować model wzrostu Ukrainy, aby był zbieżny z dynamicznym rozwojem gospodarki polskiej. Metodologia obejmuje podejście do operacjonalizacji modeli wzrostu w celu dekompozycji wzrostu PKB na komponenty popytu „skorygowane o import”, na podstawie krajowych danych dotyczących nakładów i wyników z lat 2000–2019. Zauważono, że w latach 2000–2003 obie gospodarki europejskie rozwijały się w oparciu o eksport i konsumpcję krajową. Rozszerzona integracja handlowa i wzrost BIZ po przystąpieniu Polski do UE w 2004 r. przyspieszyły przejście polskiego modelu wzrostu w kierunku strategii opartej na eksporcie oraz BIZ z przyspieszonym tempem wzrostu PKB. Na Ukrainie, w następstwie wielkiego kryzysu finansowego, zaobserwowano przejście w kierunku modelu wzrostu opartego na konsumpcji, który wraz ze spadającym komponentem inwestycyjnym zagregowanego popytu doprowadził do zaniku stóp wzrostu. Analiza wkładu poszczególnych sektorów gospodarki we wzrost PKB wykazała, że zapobieganie deindustrializacji w Polsce stanowiło podstawę strategii eksportowej tego kraju, w przeciwieństwie do Ukrainy, która przeszła po 2008 roku kluczową zmianę sektorową z produkcji na orientację opartą na sprzedaży towarów. Obie te gospodarki wykazały wysoki poziom integracji z globalnymi łańcuchami wartości, koncentrując się na pracochłonnej produkcji i usługach, ale Polska wyprzedziła Ukrainę pod względem udziału eksportu o wysokiej wartości dodanej, który wzrósł po przystąpieniu do UE. Podążając za polskim wzorcem, zaproponowano, aby model wzrostu Ukrainy pobudził siłę napędową wzrostu gospodarczego poprzez polepszenie struktury eksportu i zwiększenie łańcuchów wartości, aby odblokować możliwości wzrostu tego kraju. Opracowanie to jest pierwszym porównaniem ścieżek wzrostu gospodarczego Ukrainy i Polski, które śledzi zmiany dominujących komponentów popytu końcowego i makrosektorów w profilach wzrostu gospodarczego obu krajów. Niniejszy artykuł stanowi wkład do literatury porównawczej z zakresu ekonomii politycznej na temat modeli wzrostu gospodarek peryferyjnych, dostarczając spostrzeżeń, które mogą stanowić podstawę polityki transformacji modeli wzrostu.pl
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesComparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe;3pl
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
dc.subjectgrowth modelen
dc.subjecteconomic growthen
dc.subjectmanufacturingen
dc.subjectFDIen
dc.subjectUkraineen
dc.subjectPolanden
dc.subjectmodel wzrostupl
dc.subjectwzrost gospodarczypl
dc.subjectprodukcjapl
dc.subjectBIZpl
dc.subjectUkrainapl
dc.subjectPolskapl
dc.titleCalibrating Ukraine’s Growth Model: How Can Ukraine Emulate Poland’s Growth?en
dc.title.alternativeKalibracja modelu wzrostu Ukrainy. Jak Ukraina może powtórzyć sukces rozwojowy Polski?pl
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number191-216
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationMax Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne, Germany; SHEI Pryazovskyi State Technical University, Dnipro, Ukraineen
dc.identifier.eissn2082-6737
dc.referencesAcemoglu, D., Robinson, J.A. (2013), Economics versus Politics: Pitfalls of Policy Advice, “Journal of Economic Perspectives”, 27 (2), pp. 173–192, https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.2.173en
dc.referencesAkcay, Ü., Jungmann, B. (2022), Political Economy of Growth Regimes in Poland and Turkey, “IPE Working Papers”, 190/2022, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy, Berlin, https://www.ipe-berlin.org/fileadmin/institut-ipe/Dokumente/Working_Papers/ipe_working_paper_190.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesAri, A., Pula, G. (2021), Assessing the Macroeconomic Impact of Structural Reforms in Ukraine, “IMF Working Paper”, 2021/100, International Monetary Fund, Washington, https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513582580.001en
dc.referencesAslund, A. (2013), Poland: Combining Growth and Stability, “CESifo Forum”, ifo Institute – Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, Munich, 14 (01), pp. 3–10.en
dc.referencesAykut, D., Sanghi, A., Kosmido, G. (2017), What to Do When Foreign Direct Investment is Not Direct or Foreign: FDI Round Tripping, “World Bank Policy Research Working Paper”, 8046, World Bank, Washington, https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-8046en
dc.referencesBaccaro, L., Hadziabdic, S. (2023), Operationalizing growth models, “Quality & Quantity”, 58, pp. 1325–1360, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01685-wen
dc.referencesBaccaro, L., Pontusson, J. (2016), Rethinking Comparative Political Economy: The Growth Model Perspective, “Politics & Society”, 44 (2), pp. 175–207, https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329216638053en
dc.referencesBaccaro, L., Pontusson, J. (2018), Comparative Political Economy and Varieties of Macroeconomics, “MPIfG Discussion Paper”, 18/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne, https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_3009656_10/component/file_3015363/content (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesBalcerowicz, E. (2007), The Impact of Poland’s EU Accession on its Economy, “CASE Report”, 335, Center for Social and Economic Research, Warsaw, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1015782en
dc.referencesBan, C., Adascalitei, D. (2020), The FDI-led Growth Regimes of the East-Central and the South-East European Periphery, “CBDS Working Paper”, 2020/2, Centre for Business and Development Studies, Frederiksberg, https://research-api.cbs.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/61037562/cornel_ban_et_al_CBDS_working_paper_2020_2.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesBehringer, J., Treeck, T. van (2019), Income Distribution and Growth Models: A Sectoral Balances Approach, “Politics & Society”, 47 (3), pp. 303–332, https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329219861237en
dc.referencesBilenko, Y. (2014), Dynamic Economic Effects of EU Membership for Post Socialist Countries of Central and Eastern Europe, “Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration & Economics”, 3 (1), pp. 90–103, https://doi.org/10.2478/wrlae-2013-0045en
dc.referencesBondy, A.S., Maggor, E. (2023), Balancing the scales: labour incorporation and the politics of growth model transformation, “New Political Economy”, 29 (1), pp. 22–41, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2023.2217770en
dc.referencesBraun, B., Deeg, R. (2020), Strong Firms, Weak Banks: The Financial Consequences of Germany’s Export-led Growth Model, “German Politics”, 29 (3), pp. 358–381, https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2019.1701657en
dc.referencesBreznitz, D., Ornston, D. (2017), EU Financing and Innovation in Poland, “EBRD Working Paper”, 198, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3119663en
dc.referencesBrintseva, O. (2023), The Effectiveness of Investment in Human Capital in Poland and Ukraine: Directions for Growth Based on Comparative Analysis, “Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie”, 1 (999), pp. 31–46, https://doi.org/10.15678/ZNUEK.2023.0999.0102en
dc.referencesChenaf-Nicet, D., Rougier, E. (2016), The effect of macroeconomic instability on FDI flows: A gravity estimation of the impact of regional integration in the case of Euro-Mediterranean agreements, “International Economics”, 145, pp. 66–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2015.10.002en
dc.referencesFTSE Russell (2018), FTSE Annual Country Classification Review, London, https://www.lseg.com/content/dam/ftse-russell/en_us/documents/country-classification/ftse-country-classification-update-2018.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesGhodsee, K., Orenstein, M.A. (2021), Taking Stock of Shock: Social Consequences of the 1989 Revolutions, Oxford University Press, New York, https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197549230.001.0001en
dc.referencesGołębiowska, M. (2017), Global Value Chains: Position of Polish Economy, “Research on Enterprise in Modern Economy Theory and Practice”, 3 (22), pp. 153–164, https://doi.org/10.19253/reme.2017.03.011en
dc.referencesGrittersová, J. (2017), Borrowing Credibility: Global Banks and Monetary Regimes, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9210518en
dc.referencesGylfason, Th., Hochreiter, E., Kowalski, T. (2022), Different Choices, Divergent Paths: Poland and Ukraine, Research Report 465, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, Vienna, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26482-5_10en
dc.referencesHagemejer, J., Mućk, J. (2019), Export-led growth and its determinants: Evidence from Central and Eastern European countries, “The World Economy”, 42 (7), pp. 1994–2025, https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12790en
dc.referencesHall, P.A., Soskice, D. (2001), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford University Press, New York, https://doi.org/10.1093/0199247757.001.0001en
dc.referencesHartwell, Ch.A. (2016), Two Roads Diverge: The Transition Experience of Poland and Ukraine, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282373en
dc.referencesHavrylyshyn, O. (2017), The Political Economy of Independent Ukraine. Slow Starts, False Starts, and a Last Chance?, Palgrave Macmillan, London, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57690-3en
dc.referencesHein, E., Meloni, W.P., Tridico, P. (2021), Welfare models and demand-led growth regimes before and after the financial and economic crisis, “Review of International Political Economy”, 28 (5), pp. 1196–1223, https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1744178en
dc.referencesNational Bank of Ukraine (2023), Estimation of Round Tripping Transactions for 2010–2022, Kyiv.en
dc.referencesOECD (2002), Foreign Direct Investment for Development: Maximising benefits, minimising costs, OECD Publishing, Paris.en
dc.referencesOECD (2021), Input-Output Tables (IOTs), http://oe.cd/i-o (accessed: 19.12.2023).en
dc.referencesOECD (2023a), OECD International Direct Investment Statistics, https://doi.org/10.1787/2307437xen
dc.referencesOECD (2023b), Trade in Value Added, http://oe.cd/tiva (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesPavlova, O., Pavlov, K., Novosad, O., Irtyshcheva, I., Popadynets, N., Hryhoruk, I., Gelich, N., Suriak, A., Makara, O., Zhuk, O., Boiko, Y., Kramarenko, I. (2021), Strategic Priorities for Socio-economic Development of Ukraine in Comparison with the Republic of Poland, [in:] W. Karwowski, T. Ahram, D. Etinger, N. Tanković, R. Taiar (eds.), Human Systems Engineering and Design III . Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human Systems Engineering and Design (IHSED2020): Future Trends and Applications, September 22–24, 2020, Juraj Dobrila University of Pula, Croatia, Springer, pp. 308–314, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58282-1_49en
dc.referencesPiatkowski, M. (2014), The Warsaw Consensus: The new European growth model, [in:] G.W. Kolodko (ed.), Management and Economic Policy for Development, Nova Science Publishers, New York, pp. 309–332.en
dc.referencesPicot, G. (2021), Cross-National Variation in Growth Models: Three Sources of Extra Demand, [in:] A. Hassel, B. Palier (eds.), Growth and Welfare in Advanced Capitalist Economies: How Have Growth Regimes Evolved?, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 135–160, https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198866176.003.0004en
dc.referencesRegan, A., Brazys, S. (2018), Celtic Phoenix or Leprechaun Economics? The Politics of an FDI-led Growth Model in Europe, “New Political Economy”, 23 (2), pp. 223–238, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2017.1370447en
dc.referencesRodrik, D. (2016), Premature deindustrialization, “Journal of Economic Growth”, 21 (1), pp. 1–33, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-015-9122-3en
dc.referencesSabir, S., Khan, A. (2018), Impact of Political Stability and Human Capital on Foreign Direct Investment in East Asia & Pacific and South Asian Countries, “Asian Journal of Economic Modelling”, 6 (3), pp. 245–256, https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.8.2018.63.245.256en
dc.referencesSchwartz, H.M. (2021), Global secular stagnation and the rise of intellectual property monopoly, “Review of International Political Economy”, 29 (5), pp. 1448–1476, https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2021.1918745en
dc.referencesShepotylo, O., Kravchuk, K., Shapoval, N., Tyshchuk, T. (2017), How to boost export and foster private sector driven economic growth in Ukraine? Analysis of Ukrainian manufacturing, agriculture and IT (MAIT) sectors, Discussion paper, Kyiv School of Economics, Kyiv, https://kse.ua/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/research.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesSmits, K., Favaro, E.M., Golovach, A., Khan, F.A., Larson, D.F., Schroeder, K., Schmidt, G., Nivievskyi, O., Osmochescu, E., Ponomarenko, H., Cuaresma, J.C., Oberhofer, H., Hrebeniuk, Y., Ek, C.Ch. (2019), Ukraine Growth Study Final Document: Faster, Lasting and Kinder, World Bank Group, Washington.en
dc.referencesSpielberger, L., Voss, D. (2022), Financial adjustment as a driver of growth model change: a balance-sheet approach to comparative political economy, “Comparative European Politics”, 22, pp. 5–30, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-022-00290-9en
dc.referencesState Statistics Service of Ukraine (2023), “Input-output” table, https://stat.gov.ua/en/datasets/input-output-table (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesUN Commodity Trade Statistics Database (n.d.), https://comtradeplus.un.org/ (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesUNCTAD (2021), World Investment Report 2021: Investing in Sustainable Recovery, United Nations Publications, Geneva.en
dc.referencesVenger, V., Romanovska, N., Chyzhevska, M. (2022), Integration of Ukraine to the Global Value Chains, “Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe”, 25 (2), pp. 137–161, https://doi.org/10.18778/1508-2008.25.17en
dc.referencesVukov, V. (2023), Growth models in Europe’s Eastern and Southern peripheries: between national and EU politics, “New Political Economy”, 28 (5), pp. 832–848, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2023.2189695en
dc.referencesWorld Bank (n.d.), Foreign direct investment, net inflows (% of GDP), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.KLT.DINV.WD.GD.ZS (accessed: 20.12.2023).en
dc.referencesYoung, O.R. (1983), Regime dynamics: the rise and fall of international regimes, “International Organization”, 36 (2), pp. 277–297, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300018956en
dc.contributor.authorEmailkamyshnykova_e_v@pstu.edu
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1508-2008.27.27
dc.relation.volume27


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Poza zaznaczonymi wyjątkami, licencja tej pozycji opisana jest jako https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0