Мы используем файлы cookies для улучшения работы сайта НИУ ВШЭ и большего удобства его использования. Более подробную информацию об использовании файлов cookies можно найти здесь, наши правила обработки персональных данных – здесь. Продолжая пользоваться сайтом, вы подтверждаете, что были проинформированы об использовании файлов cookies сайтом НИУ ВШЭ и согласны с нашими правилами обработки персональных данных. Вы можете отключить файлы cookies в настройках Вашего браузера.
Покровский бульвар, 11 корп.S,
тел: (495) 772-95-99 доб.27503, 27502, 27498
Тел.: (967) 170-0219
During the first decade of the present century the countries which accessed the EU were characterised by high GDP growth rates while most of their regions displayed negative net-migration rates. At the same time, the new member states’ human capital endowments were high relative to their GDP levels, creating incentives to emigrate. The present paper takes a detailed look at the interplay of regional human capital endowments and migration. First, by theoretically examining migration’s determinants and second, by testing the corresponding findings via panel econometric regressions for the EU’s new member states’ regions. The results display positive impacts of net-migration on regional human capital growth rates, improving the economic potential of thriving regions but possibly increasing disparities within countries.
This article investigates whether the level of academics’ societal engagement (ASE) is higher or lower at universities with leading research university (LRU) status compared with institutions at lower status levels within vertically stratified systems. In a theory-based purposeful sampling, we studied the correlation of LRU-status and ASE in Canada and Germany (intra-academic competition-based status model) and Kazakhstan and Russia (state-assigned status model). In Canada and Germany, universities have self-organized LRU-status groupings, such as the U15. In Kazakhstan and Russia, the National Universities’ LRU-status was assigned by the state. In Russia and Germany, Excellence Initiatives blur status-assignation models. Survey data is provided by the cross-country study “Academic Profession in Knowledge Society (APIKS)”. We find that techno-commercial ASE is only positively correlated with LRU-status in countries with state-assigned status groupings. Dissemination ASE is not correlated to LRU-status. Negative correlations between dissemination ASE and LRU-status are found in Canada. The results show that societal recognition (captured by industry, ministry, etc. grants) and LRU-status run in parallel in Russia and in Kazakhstan. In comparison with Russia, societal recognition is a distinct mechanism in Germany, which is not triggered by LRU-status. In Canada, ASE is mainly correlated with individual (status) determinants.
On the eve of transition in the late 1980’s the perspectives of the economic development for most economies of the Soviet Bloc in Central, Southern and Eastern Europe seemed optimistic. They had been already industrialized; their labor force was relatively healthy and educated. Being technological backwards in many industries these countries had lots of opportunities for catch up, extending international trade and allowing the inflow of foreign direct investments. However, after two decades of transition these expectations did not materialize to the fullest extent. On the one hand, by 2008, the last year before the global financial crisis, GDP per capita of all post-transition economies grew, except Moldova and Ukraine. On the other hand, six of the twenty economies of the region increased the lag behind the twelve advanced West European economies (EU12). A reasonable question in this context is to what extent is this backward take-off caused by the command-economy past or some myopic country-specific issues of the post-transition development?
With the growth accounting framework this study confirms the leading role of total factor productivity in late transition at the aggregate level. Delving into industry levels the literature shows that, at least, for some East European economies the key driver of TFP growth in most CEE economies was manufacturing. This is not surprising, because manufacturing was also one of the most technologically backward sectors of the economy in early transition with multiple opportunities for improvements through adaptation of better practices and ways of production from the West. So, catching up in technologies seems to be the most essential driver of the post transition growth.
At the same time, this exposition of the story of growth in transition critically depends on data quality, essential for measurement of economic growth and productivity. That is why it is important also to take into account that transition in economies of the region coincided with the transition in state statistics from the Material Product System of national accounts to the United Nations System of National Accounts. All this is important for understanding of the lim