Macroeconomic stability and the level of competitiveness in EU member states: a comparative dynamic approach

• Authors: Elżbieta Roszko-Wójtowicz , Maria M. Grzelak

Abstracts

EN

Research background: The choice of the issue of international competitive-ness of economies as the research problem addressed in this paper has been mainly dictated by the changes observed in the nature of the development of EU economies and the need to assess the competitiveness of the Polish economy. It is time to evaluate and learn from the largest enlargement in the history of the EU which took place in May 2004. An assessment of changes in the state of EU economies, including the Polish economy, is in the centre of research interest of many scientists. National competitiveness is the subject of a great deal of research and economic studies. Integration and globalisation processes in the world economy are the main reasons for the popularity of this topic. The efficient use of sources and factors determining the competitiveness of economies, sectors and enterprises is associated with prosperity over the long term. One of the methods based on the observation of selected basic indicators of economic competitiveness is the method of analysis called the macroeconomic stabilisation pentagon. The method illustrates the extent to which the government achieves five macroeconomic objectives. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to meet all these objectives at the same time. The difficulty of meeting all these goals concurrently is due to the fact that they are more or less competitive rather than complementary. The proposed assessment of competitiveness based on the developed model of macroeconomic stabilisation pentagon is a unique approach in terms of discussion of country's competitiveness. This approach significantly distinguishes the current study in comparison with standard international reports on competitiveness such as the Global Competitiveness Index or the EU Regional Competitiveness Index. Purpose of the article: The main aim of the paper is to assess the competitiveness of EU economies in the years 2005-2018, based on a selected set of diagnostic variables referring to the concept of macroeconomic stabilisation pentagon. The paper also formulates a detailed list of four research hypotheses. Methods: In order to characterise the competitiveness of the European Union economies, including the EU-15 and EU-13 groups, as well as the Visegrad group, six diagnostic variables affecting the economic situation of individual EU countries were analysed. The variables for analysis were chosen so as to reliably describe the competitive position of a given country, at the same time referring in a substantive sense to the concept of macroeconomic stabilisation pentagon. The linear ordering of objects was made using the reference Hellwig method. The selected method enabled the development of competitiveness rankings of EU Member States in the years 2005, 2009, and 2018. Findings & Value added: The comparative analysis of the main macroeconomic indicators conducted in the paper forms the basis for assessing the current state of the EU economy in relation to other countries. In the paper, the authors depart from the standard elaboration of 'magic pentagon.' Instead, they apply the variables used in the macroeconomic stabilisation pentagon analysis to develop competitiveness rankings of EU Member States. The con-ducted empirical study has confirmed that the 15th anniversary of EU member-ship had a decidedly positive impact on the level of economic development of the EU-13 countries.

Keywords

EN

macroecnomic stabilisation pentagon; competitiveness; competitive position; competitive capacity; Hellwig's method; linear ordering; European Union

• Publisher: Instytut Badań Gospodarczych
• Journal: Oeconomia Copernicana
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 11
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 657-688

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Elżbieta Roszko-Wójtowicz

• University of Lodz

• https://orcid.org/0000000193377218

author

Maria M. Grzelak

• University of Lodz

• https://orcid.org/0000000343539893

References

• Ahangari, A., Arman, A., & Saki, A. (2014). The estimation of Iran's macroeconomics instability index. Management Science Letters, 4(5), 871-882. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2014.4.003.
• Aiginger, K. (1998). A framework for evaluating the dynamic competitiveness of countries. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 9(2), 159-188. doi: 10.1016/S0954-349X(97)00026-X.
• Aiginger, K. (2000). Europe's position in quality competition. Background report for European Competitiveness Report. Brussels: European Commission.
• Aiginger, K., & Landesmann M. (2002). Competitive economic performance: the European view. WIFO Working Papers, 179.
• Altomonte, C., & Ottaviano, G.I.P. (2011). The role of international production sharing in EU productivity and competitiveness. European Investment Bank Papers, 16(1), 62-89.
• Altomonte, C., Aquilante, T., & Ottaviano, G. (2012). The triggers of competitiveness: the EFIGE cross-country report. Brussels: Bruegel.
• Annoni, P., Dijkstra, L., & Gargano, N. (2017). The EU regional competitiveness index 2016. European Commission Working Paper, WP 02/2017. doi: 10.2776/94425.
• Balcerzak, A. P. (2016). Multiple-criteria evaluation of quality of human capital in the European Union countries. Economics and Sociology, 9(2), 11-26. doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2016/9-2/1.
• Balcerzak, A. P. (2020). Quality of institutions in the European Union countries. Application of TOPSIS based on entropy measure for objective weighting. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 17(1), 101-122. doi: 10.12700/APH.17.1.2020.1.6.
• Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2017a). Digital economy in Visegrad countries. Multiple-criteria decision analysis at regional level in the years 2012 and 2015. Journal of Competitiveness, 9(2), 5-18. doi: 10.7441/joc.2017.02.01.
• Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2017b). TOPSIS with Generalized Distance Measure GDM in assessing poverty and social exclusion at regional level in Visegrad countries. In P. Pražák (Ed.). 35th international conference mathematical methods in economics MME 2017 conference proceedings. Hradec Králové: University of Hradec Králové, 18-23.
• Bąk, A. (2016). Linear ordering of objects using Hellwig and TOPSIS methods - a comparative analysis. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 426, 22-31.
• Berger, I. (2011). An overview and analysis on indices of regional competitiveness. Review of Economics and Finance, 1, 17-33.
• Berger, T. (2008). Concepts on national competitiveness. Journal of International Business and Economy, 9(1), 3-17.
• Blanchard, O., & Giavazzi, F. (2002). Current account deficits in the Euro area: the end of the Feldstein-Harioka puzzle? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 33(2), 142-210.
• Blanchard, O., & Milesi-Feretti, G. M. (2011). (Why) should current account balances be reduced? IMF Staff Discussion Note, SDN/11/03.
• Borowski, J. (2015). International competitiveness: theoretical concepts. Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne, 4(76), 25-42. doi: 10.15290/ose.2015.04.76.02.
• Burda, M. C., & Dluhosch, B. (2002). Cost competition, fragmentation, and globalization. Review of International Economics, 10(3), 424-441. doi: 10.1111/14 67-9396.00341.
• Burda, M. C., & Severgnini, B. (2009). TFP growth in old and new Europe. SFB 649, Discussion Paper, Humboldt University, 2009-033.
• Castellani, D., Piva, M., Schubert, T., & Vivarelli, M. (2018). Can European productivity make progress? Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, 53(2), 7578. doi: 10.1007/s1027201807258.
• Castellani, D., Piva, M., Schubert, T., & Vivarelli, M. (2016). The productivity impact of R&D investment: a comparison between the EU and the US. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Papers, 9937.
• Castles, I., & Henderson, D. (2005). International comparisons of GDP: issues of theory and practice. World Economics, 6(1), 55-66. doi: 10.22459/mpw.04. 2014.16.
• Cheba, K., & Szopik-Depczyńska, K. (2017). Multidimensional comparative analysis of the competitive capacity of the European Union countries and geographical regions. Oeconomia Copernicana, 8(4), 487-504. doi: 10.24136/oc.v8 i4.30.
• Chen, Y., Kersten, G., Vetschera, R., & Xu, H. (Eds.). (2018). Group decision and negotiation in an uncertain world. GDN 2018, 18th International Conference Proceedings. Nanjing, China.
• Chikan, A. (2008). National and firm competitiveness: a general research model. Competitiveness Review, 18(1), 20-28. doi: 10.1108/10595420810874583.
• Cho, D. S., & Moon, H. C. (2013). From Adam Smith to Michael Porter: evolution of competitiveness theory. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company. doi: 10.1142/8451.
• Cho, D., & Hwy-Chang, M. (2000). From Adam Smith to Michael Porter: evaluation of competitiveness theory. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
• Cho, D. S., Moon, H. C., & Kim, M. Y. (2009). Does one size fit all? A dual double diamond approach to country-specific advantages. Asian Business and Management, 8(1), 83-102. doi: 10.1057/abm.2008.27.
• Clyde, V., & Prestowitz, J. (1994). Playing to win. Foreign Affairs, 73(4), 186-189, doi: 10.2307/20046815.
• Cohen, S. (1994). Speaking freely. Foreign Affairs, 73(4), 194-197. doi: 10.2307 /20046818.
• Daszkiewicz, N. (Ed.). (2008). Konkurencyjność. Poziom makro, mezo i mikro. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
• Dia, M., & Abdelaziz, F. (2011). A hierarchical methodology for performance evaluation based on Data Envelopment Analysis: the case of companies? competitiveness in an economy. American Journal of Operations Research, 1(3), 134-146. doi: 10.4236/ajor.2011.13015.
• Dunning, J. H. (Ed.). (2000). Globalization, regions, and the knowledge-based economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Delgado, M., Ketels, C., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2012). The determinants of national competitiveness. NBER Working Paper, 18249. doi: 10.3386/w1824.
• DiRienzo, C., Das, J., & Burbridge, J. (2007). Does diversity impact competitiveness? A cross country analysis. Competitiveness Review, 17(3), 135-152.
• Dresch, A., Collatto, D. C., & Lacerda, D. P. (2018). Theoretical understanding between competitiveness and productivity: firm level. Industrial Engineering, 20(2), 69-86. doi: 10.25100/iyc.v20i2.5897.
• Eichengreen, B. (2006). Global imbalances: the new economy, the dark matter, the savvy investor, and the standard analysis. Journal of Policy Modeling, 28(6), 645-652. doi: 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2006.06.001.
• Esty, D. C., & Porter M. E. (2002). Ranking national environmental regulation and performance: a leading indicator of future competitiveness? In M. E. Porter, J. D. Sachs, P. K. Cornelius, J. W. McArthur & K. Schwab (Eds). The global competitiveness report 2001?2002. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 78-101.
• European Commission (2019). Alert mechanism report 2020. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank and the European Economic and Social Committee, COM(2019)651 final. Strasbourg: European Commission.
• Fagerberg, J. (2002). Technology, growth and competitiveness. Selected Essays. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Frieden, J., & Rogowski R. (1996). The impact of the international economy on national policies: an analytical overview. In R. O. Keohane & H. V. Milner (Eds.). Internationalization and domestic politics. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511664168.003.
• Gardiner, B., Martin, R., & Tyler, P. (2006). Competitiveness, productivity and economic growth across the European regions. In R. Martin, M. Kitson, & P. Tyler (Eds.). Regional competitiveness. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780 203607046.
• Gorynia, M. (2019). Competition and globalisation in economic sciences. Selected aspects. Economics and Business Review, 5/19(3), 118-133. doi: 10.18559/ebr. 2019.3.7.
• Gruber, J. W., & Kamin, S. B. (2007). Explaining the global pattern of current account imbalances. Journal of International Money and Finance, 26(4), 500-522. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.854224.
• Grabiński, T., Wydymus, S., & Zeliaś, A. (1989). Metody taksonomii numerycznej w modelowaniu zjawisk społeczno-gospodarczych. Warszawa: PWN.
• Grabiński, T., Wydymus, S., & Zeliaś, A. (1982). Metody doboru zmiennych w modelach ekonometrycznych. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1982.
• Hämäläinen, T. J. (2003). National competitiveness and economic growth, the changing determinants of economic performance in the world economy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Huggins, R., Izushi, H., & Thompson, P. (2013). Regional competitiveness: theories and methodologies for empirical analysis. Journal of CENTRUM Cathedra (JCC): The Business and Economics Research Journal, 6(2), 155-172. doi: 10.7835/jcc-berj-2013-0086.
• Hurduzeu, G., & Lazar, M. I. (2015). An assessment of economic stability under the new European economic governance. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 3(2).
• IMD (2020). The IMD World Competitivenss Yearbook 2020. Switzerland: IMD.
• Ketels, C. (2016). Review of competitiveness frameworks: an analysis conducted for the Irish National Competitiveness Council. Retrieved from http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Review%20of%20Competitiveness%20Frameworks%20_3905ca5fc5e6-419b-8915-5770a2494381.pdf. (1.02.2020).
• Kim, K. M., & Kwon, H.-K. (2017). The state's role in globalization: Korea's experience from a comparative perspective. Politics & Society, 45(4), 505-531. doi: 10.1177/0032329217715614.
• Kołodko, G. W. (1994). The Vishegrad economies in transition: the comparative perspective of the macroeconomic stabilization pentagon. In H. Herr, S. Tober, & A. Westphal (Eds.). Macroeconomic problems of transformation. Stabilization policies and economic restructuring. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 115-123.
• Krugman, P. (1996). Making sense of the competitiveness debate. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 12(3), 17-25. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/12.3.17.
• Krugman, P. (1994). Competitiveness: a dangerous obsession. Foreign Affairs, 73(2), 28-44.
• Lanoie, P., Laurent-Lucchetti, J., Johnstone, N., & Ambec, S. (2011). Environmental policy, innovation and performance: new insights on the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 20(3), 803-842. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9134.2011.00301.x.
• Liu, C. (2017). International competitiveness and the fourth industrial revolution. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(4), 111-133. doi: 10.1567 8/EBER.2017.050405.
• Lyulyov, O., & Shvindina, H. (2017). Stabilization pentagon model: application in the management at macro- and micro-levels. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(3), 42-52. doi: 10.21511/ppm.15(3).2017.04.
• Machek, O., & Hnilica, J. (2012). Total factor productivity approach in competitive and regulated world. Procedia ? Social and Behavioral Sciences, 57, 223-230. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1178.
• Marsh, K., Goetghebeur, M., Thokala, P., & Baltussen, R. (Eds.). (2017). Multi-criteria decision analysis to support healthcare decisions. Berlin, Germany: Springer International Publishing AG. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-47540-0_5.
• Martin, R., Kitson, M., & Tyler, P. (2006). Regional competitiveness: an elusive yet key concept? In R. Martin, M. Kitson & P. Tyler (Eds.). Regional competitiveness. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203607046.
• Martínez, V., & Sanchez-Robles, R.B. (2012). Macroeconomic stability and growth in Eastern Europe. In G. Erreygers & W. Meeusen (Eds.). Macroeconomics and beyond: essays in honour of Wim Meeusen. Garant: Antwerpen.
• Matkowski, Z., Rapacki, R., & Próchniak, M. (2016). Porównanie wyników gospodarczych Polska na tle Unii Europejskiej. In M. A. Weresa (Ed.). Polska. Raport o konkurencyjności 2016. Warszawa: Szkoła Główna Handlowa ? Oficyna Wydawnicza.
• Misala, J. (2011). Międzynarodowa konkurencyjność gospodarki narodowej. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne.
• Młodak, A. (2006). Analiza taksonomiczna w statystyce regionalnej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Difin.
• Momaya, K. S. (2019). The past and the future of competitiveness research: a review in an emerging context of innovation and EMNEs. International Journal of Global Business and Competitiveness, 14, 1-10. doi: 10.1007/s42943-019-00002-3.
• Montiel, P., & Servén L. (2006). Macroeconomic stability in developing countries: how much is enough? World Bank Research Observer, 21(2), 151-178. doi: 10.1093/wbro/lkl005.
• Moon, H. C., & Cho, D. S. (2000). National competitiveness: a nine factor approach and its empirical application. Journal of International Business and Economy, Fall, 17-38.
• Mróz, J. (2016). Determinanty i miary międzynarodowej konkurencyjności gospodarki. In P. Urbanek & E. Walińska (Eds). Ekonomia i nauki o zarządzaniu w warunkach integracji europejskiej. Ekonomia i Zarządzanie w Teorii i Praktyce, Tom 9. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 15-29.
• Nehme, G. N. (2014). Ensuring effectiveness of economic and monetary policies through considering economic schools of thought: Lebanon 1990-2010. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2(4), 197-205. doi: 10.4236/jss.2014.24020.
• Nehme, G. N., & Nehme, E. (2014) Competitive advantage of nations and multilateral trade system: how can Lebanon benefit from trade liberalization without enhancing its strategic industries? Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 217-231. doi: 10.4236/jss.2014.24023.
• Obstfeld, M., & Taylor, A. M. (2002). Globalization and capital market. NBER, Working Paper, 8846.
• Panek, T. (2009) Statystyczne metody wielowymiarowej analizy porównawczej. Warszawa: Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie.
• Perenyi, Á. (2016). Diagnosing cluster competitiveness using firm level data in the profit-growth nexus framework. Acta Oeconomica, 66(3), 469-463. doi: 10.1556/032.2016.66.3.4.
• Petricevic, O., & Teece, D.J. (2019). The structural reshaping of globalization: implications for strategic sectors, profiting from innovation, and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 1487-1512. doi: 10.1057/s41267-019-00269-x.
• Pieloch-Babierz, A., Misztal, A., & Kowalska M. (2020). An impact of macroeconomic stabilization on the sustainable development of manufacturing enterprises: the case of Central and Eastern European Countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00988-4.
• Porter, M., Stern, S., & Green, M. (2016). Social progress index 2016. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/mx/Documents/about-deloitte/Social-Progress-Index-2016-Report.pdf. (11.06.2020).
• Porter, M. E. (2003). The economic performance of regions. Regional Studies, 37(6/7), 549-578. doi: 10.1080/0034340032000108688.
• Porter, M. E. (2001). Porter o konkurencji. Warszawa: PWE.
• Porter, M. E. (1998). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.
• Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68, 73-93.
• Rogalska, E. (2018a). Cluster analysis of entrepreneurial environment in Polish regions. In M. Reiff & P. Gezik (Eds.). Proceedings of the international scientific conference quantitative methods in economics multiple criteria decision making XIX. Trenčianske Teplice: Letra Edu, 305-312.
• Rogalska, E. (2018b). Measurement of entrepreneurship conditions in Polish regions. In T. Loster & T. Pavelka (Eds.). The 11th international days of statistics and economics. Conference proceedings. September 6-8, 2018. Prague: Libuse Macakova, Melandrium, 1479-1487.
• Rogalska, E. (2018c). Taxonomic measure of development with entropy weights in assessment of entrepreneurial conditions in Poland. In 36th international conference mathematical methods in economics MME 2018 conference proceedings. Prague: MatfyzPress, Publishing House of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Charles University, 463-469.
• Roszko-Wójtowicz, E., Grzelak, M. M., & Laskowska, I. (2019). The impact of research and development activity on the TFP level in manufacturing in Poland. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 14(4), 711-737. doi: 10.24136/eq.2019.033.
• Roszko-Wójtowicz, E., & Białek J. (2019). Measurement of the average innovativeness change overtime in the EU member states. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(2), 268-293, doi: 10.3846/jbem.2019.8337.
• Rugman, A. M., & D'Cruz, J. R. (1993). The "Double diamond" model of international competitiveness: the Canadian experience. Management International Review, 33(2), 17-39.
• Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1993). How to operationalize porter's diamond of international competitiveness. International Executive, 35(4), 283-299. doi: 10.1002/tie.5060350403
• Rusu, V. D., & Roman, A. (2018) An empirical analysis of factors affecting competitiveness of C.E.E. countries. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 31(1), 2044-2059. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2018.1480969.
• Santos, A. D., Ribeiro, S., Castela, G., & da Silva N. T. (2017). The dynamics between economic growth and living standards in EU countries: a STATICO approach for the period 2006?2014. Estudios de economía aplicada, 35(3), 629-652.
• Schwab, K. (Ed.). (2019). The global competitiveness report 2019. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
• Schwab, K., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (2013). The global competitiveness report 2013-2014. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
• Su, W., Zhang, D., Zhang, C., Abrhám, J., Simionescu, M., Yaroshevich, N., & Guseva, V. (2018). Determinants of foreign direct investment in the Visegrad group countries after the EU enlargement. Technological and Economic Devel-opment of Economy, 24(5). doi: 10.3846/tede.2018.5487.
• Walesiak, M. (2011). Uogólniona miara odległości GDM w statystycznej analizie wielowymiarowej z wykorzystaniem programu R, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu.
• Walesiak, M. (2004). Metody porządkowania liniowego. In E. Gatnar, M. Walesiak (Eds.). Metody statystycznej analizy wielowymiarowej w badaniach marketingowych. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej im. Oskara Langego we Wrocławiu.
• Weresa, M. A. (Ed.). (2016). Poland: competitiveness report 2016. The role of economic policy and institutions. Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics Press. Retrieved from https://ssl-kolegia.sgh.waw.pl/pl/KGS/struktura/IGS-KGS/publi kacje/Documents/Raport_POLAND2016.pdf. (18.10.2019).
• Weresa, M. A. (2008). Definicja, determinanty oraz sposoby pomiaru konkurencyjności krajów. In W. Bieńkowski & M. A. Weresa (Eds.). Czynniki i miary międzynarodowej konkurencyjności gospodarek w kontekście globalizacji. Warszawa: Szkoła Główna Handlowa.
• Vachris, M. A. (1999). International price comparisons based on purchasing power parity. Monthly Labor Review, October.
• Zanakis, S. H., & Becerra-Fernandez, I. (2005). Competitiveness of nations, a knowledge discovery examination. European Journal of Operational Research, 166(1), 185-211. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.03.028.
• Zeliaś, A. (2004). Taksonomiczna analiza przestrzennego zróżnicowania poziomu życia w Polsce w ujęciu dynamicznym. Kraków: Akademia Ekonomiczna.
• Żuchowska, D. (2013). Assessment of the Central and Eastern Europe economies in the years 2007-2010 based on the model of the macroeconomic stabilization pentagon. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 8(4), 49-64. doi: 10.12775/EQUIL.2013.026.

Identifiers

DOI

10.24136/oc.2020.027

Biblioteka Nauki

19233596