204A. Chetverikova (chetverikova@imemo.ru),
Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), 23, Profsoyuznaya Str., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation
Acknowledgements. The article was prepared at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences and supported by a grant from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project no. 19-010-00107 “The Limits of Independence of the Visegrad Group in the EU: Choice of National Strategies, Response to common European Challenges, Development of Relations with the Russian Federation”).
Abstract. The article is devoted to the analysis of the transformation processes in the Visegrad countries that have occurred since their entry into the European Union. The author characterizes common economic results of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic in relation to the European trends and positions of the main member states that allow to evaluate the results of the transformation processes in every member of the V4. The features of individual countries in the external trade sector, investment sector, financial stability and labour market are specified. The author describes the main reasons of economic development of the V4 among which inflows of FDI and developed foreign trade sector are identified. The TNCs’ role in the economies of the Visegrad countries is analyzed including its influence on the economic structures of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. The conclusion is made about a disproportionately developed secondary sector in the region compared to the EU due to the presence of foreign capital. Special attention is paid to the question of the dependence of the Visegrad countries on the EU, including the influence of financial flows from the European Union on their economic development. An assessment of revenues from the EU budget to the Visegrad countries and the positions of these countries in relation to other EU members is given. The reasons for the non-entry of Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic into the Eurozone are analyzed. Not only political motives, but also economic, social reasons of permanent shift of the euro adoption terms are considered. In general, the V4’s fifteen-year period of participation in the EU can be called difficult, however, the countries managed to advance in further integration into the EU while maintaining the heterogeneity of economic results within the Visegrad Group itself.
Keywords: The Visegrad Group, economic development, EU integration, EU norms, Eurozone
REFERENCES
1. Molendowski E. An International Competitive Economy: a Сomparison of Poland and the Visegrad Group in the Рost-Аccession Рeriod. Comparative Economic Research, 2017, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 5-21.
2. Материалы международного круглого стола “К 15-летию членства центральноевропейских стран в ЕС”. 17.05.2019. [Materials of the International Round Table “To the 15th Anniversary of the Membership of the Central European Countries in the EU”. 17.05.2019 (In Russ.)] Available at: http://visegradeurope.ru/ru_RU/2019/05/19/%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%B4%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BB%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BB-%D0%BA-15-%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8E-%D1%86%D0%B5/ (accessed 03.07.2019).
3. Shishelina L.N. Vishegradskaya chetverka i Evropeiskii soyuz [Visegrad Four and the European Union]. Sovremennaya Evropa, 2007, no. 4(32), pp. 56-69.
4. Molendowski E. 10 years of Membership in the European Union – Poland in Comparison with the Visegrad Group Countries. Central European Review of Economics&Finance, 2015, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 5-18.
5. Chetverikova A. S. Vneshnetorgovye svyazi Vishegradskoi gruppy: transformaciya roli RF [Foreign trade relations of the Visegrad Group: transformation of the Russian Federation role]. Kontury global’nykh transformacii: politika, ekonomika, pravo, 2019, no. 2, pp. 197-211.
6. Eurostat Database. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (accessed 03.07.2019).
7. The World Bank Data. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator (accessed 03.07.2019).
8. Shishelina L.N., Vedernikov M.V., eds. Central’naya Evropa: politicheskii portret na fone 100-letiya [Central Europe: a Political Portrait on the Background of the 100th Anniversary]. Moscow, Institute of Europe RAS, 2018. 240 p.
9. Jedlicka J., Kotian J., Munz R. Visegrad Four – 10 years of EU membership. Wien, Erste Group Research, 2014. 23 p. Available at: https://www.erstebank.hr/content/dam/hr/ebc/www_erstebank_hr/misc/press/2014/2014_04_23_EN_Report_Visegrad.pdf (accessed 03.07.2019).
10. Dorozynski T., Kuna-Marszalek A. Investment Attractiveness. The Case of the Visegrad Group Countries. Comparative Economic Research, 2016, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 119-140.
11. Coface CEE Top 500 Ranking. 2018. Available at: https://www.coface.com/News-Publications/Publications/Coface-CEE-TOP-500-Companies-2018-Edition (accessed 03.07.2019).
12. Pawlas E. The Visegrad Countries and European Union Membership – Selected Issues. Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 2704866, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, pp. 582-593. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/sek/iacpro/2704866.html#download (accessed 03.07.2019).
13. European Commission. European Structural & Investment Funds. Revealed: the Historic Pattern of EU Investment in Your Region. Available at: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/stories/s/Historic-EU-payment-data-by-region-NUTS%E2%80%912-/47md-x4nq (accessed 03.07.2019).
14. European Commission. European Structural & Investment Funds. Countries. Available at: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/countries/CZ (accessed 03.07.2019).
15. Zawistowski J., ed. Evaluation of Benefits to the EU‑15 Countries Resulting from the Implementation of the Cohesion Policy in the Visegrad Group Countries. Warsaw, IBS, 2011. 185 p. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c58f/b56591f6c9b3d5e205d0df324aa65699316f.pdf (accessed 03.07.2019).
16. European Commission. EU Expenditure and Revenue 2000–2017. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/figures/interactive/index_en.cfm (accessed 03.07.2019).
17. European Central Bank. Convergence Report. May 2019. Available at: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/conrep/ecb.cr201805.en.pdf?ee1c3b309ded218fe2785c36ce4d65ba (accessed 03.07.2019).
18. Dandashly A. Domestic Politics Comes First – Euro Adoption Strategies in Central Europe: the Case of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. Doctoral Dissertation. Victoria (Canada), University of Victoria, 2012. 321 p.
19. Introduction of the Euro in the Member States That Have not yet Adopted the Common Currency. Flash Eurobarometer 479. 2019. 76 p. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/yearFrom/1974/yearTo/2019/surveyKy/2242 (accessed 03.07.2019).
Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX
No comments