Die Krise der Ordnungspolitik als Kommunikationskrise

The conception of economic order policy (in German: Ordnungspolitik) has been the theoretical foundation of the Social Market Economy in Germany after World War II. But nowadays, the conception of Ordnungspolitik is in a fundamental crisis. It has been removed by Keynesian conceptions or still an arbitrariness of economic policy. Currently, while in Germany growth rates increase there is taken less and less notice of the necessity of fundamental changes in economic policy. In contrast, the current crisis of economic order policy is surprising. The collapse of central planned economies in Eastern Europe as well as the crisis of developing countries in Southeast Asia has allowed market ideas to appear as a clear winner in the competition of economic ideas. Many former transformation countries in central and Eastern Europe are nowadays rising dynamic market economies. Other countries of the world have already successfully reformed their overloaded welfare states, with only Germany seeming to face insurmountable obstacles. The current crisis of order policy is also of communication. In the end the discussion on order policy as main economic policy has been replaced by the contraposition of neo-liberal and globalization-critical conceptions. However, the crisis of order policy is at least partly also a crisis of communicating order policy positions. This fact refers both to the science, where regulatory-political teachings and research were consistently pushed back without resistance, and also to the policy, where basic principles of economic order policy became nearly insignificant. It is however the inability of German politicians and scientist to make clear economic order policy which keeps Germany imprisoned in its stagnation. To improve the position of the conception of economic order policy - or in other words of Social Market Economy - the authors demand a better manifestation of these conceptions via internet. As a first step they created the Ordnungspolitisches Portal. --Economic Order Policy,Social Market Economy,Germany

Cambodia’s Transition to Sustainable Development: Preconditions, Recommendations, Obstacles

Cambodia suffered dramatically from the Khmer Rouge regime in 1975 to 1979 as well as from Vietnam’s invasion and the following civil war till 1989. Both caused enormous destruction, not only of infrastructure, educational institutions, the financial and health system, but – even more importantly – to its human capital. After 1989 Cambodia’s economic transformation started but is insufficient until now. The conception of a market order – introduced by Walter Eucken (1952/90) - may be a helpful approach to improve the economic and social situation in the country. But before constitutive or regulative principles of a market order can be implemented in Cambodia successfully some basic political problems must be solved. They are defined already by North / Wallis / Weingast (2009) as rule of law for the elite, civil society, and consolidated control of the military. Additionally, there are further obstacles which must be drawn into consideration like cultural differences etc. It is the aim of this paper to describe the political and economic situation in Cambodia briefly. Then the necessary preconditions for sustainable development in the country will be introduced. Subsequently an economic policy in line with the market order conception will be recommended and further obstacles will be discussed, at least

10 lat Kompleksu Przemysłowego Keasong: krótka historia ostatniego projektu współpracy gospodarczej Półwyspu Koreańskiego

After fife month the special economic zone Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC) in North Korea was reopened again on 16 September 2013. By this way, it is the last remaining centrepiece of North–South economic cooperation on the Korean peninsula. Established during the period of “Sunshine policy” (1998 – 2007) and opened in 2003 the project was controversial from the first beginning. This article will give an overview about the history of the project explaining its economic importance for both sides and the peaceful development in Korea. While KIC was assumed to strengthen inter-Korean relations, to improve knowledge of North Koreans about market economy, competition and democracy at all, it failed. What remains is a possibility for North Korea to earn money from the South – and for South Korea a possibility to use the cheap labour force of the North. In contrast, all political attempts grasped at nothing. Therefore, also the last remaining relict of this era should be closed down finally.Po pięciu miesiącach, specjalna strefa ekonomiczna Kompleks Przemysłowy Keasong (ang. Kaesong Industrial Complex, KIC) w Korei Północnej została ponownie otwarta 16 września 2013 roku. Stanowi to ostatnią pozostałą oznakę współpracy gospodarczej pomiędzy północą o południem na Półwyspie Koreańskim. Ustanowiony w okresie „słonecznej polityki” (1998-2007) i otwarty w 2003 roku projekt było kontrowersyjny od samego początku. Niniejszy artykuł zawiera przegląd historii projektu, wyjaśniając jednocześnie jego znaczenie dla obu stron oraz dla pokojowego rozwoju w Korei. KIC miał wzmocnić relacje międzykoreańskie, poprawić wiedzę mieszkańców Korei Północnej na temat gospodarki rynkowej, konkurencji i demokracji, jednak zakończył się niepowodzeniem. Pozostała jedynie możliwość zarobienia przez Koreę Północną pieniędzy od Korei Południowej, a dla Korei Południowej – możliwość wykorzystywania taniej siły roboczej z Północy. Co więcej, wszystkie próby polityczne spełzły na niczym. Z tego względu, jedyny ostały relikt tej ery powinien zostać ostatecznie zamknięty

From independence to the Euro introduction: varieties of capitalism in the Baltic States

The Baltic States, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, are very successful in transformation. From 1991 to 2015 they regained independence and transformed their economies from socialist central planning into functioning market economies, joined the EU in 2004 and became member of the Euro zone. Estonia introduced the Euro al-ready in 2011 while Latvia followed in 2014 and Lithuania in 2015. Thereof follow two questions. First, why all three Baltic countries are so successful? And secondly, do we really find everywhere the pattern of the “Shining star” Estonia, followed by Latvia and at least Lithuania? According to modern Varieties of Capitalism theory all three economies can be classified as Central and Eastern European Countries in the style of Liberal Market Economies (CEEC-LME). As can be shown, there are also differences in the institutional setups of all three Baltic States. During the period of transformation a pattern of Estonia followed by Latvia and at least Lithuania evolved which is also reflected by the sequence of joining Euro area. But institutional patterns are not determined in the long run. Since the crisis of 2008/09 the pattern within the Baltics changed. While Estonia remains on the first rank Lithuania overtook Latvia in terms of growth and wealth. Deregulation in Lithuania – which may be observed by the development of the Economic Freedom Index of the Heritage Foundation within the last ten years – may be the main reason. But also, the low sophistication of the Lithuanian banking system as well as Latvia’s massive suffering from the crisis may explain the last change of the pattern in the Baltics. There are several possibilities to illustrate the different paths of development of the Baltic States. While Geography Hypothesis is not able to explain the differences, the extractive political institutions in Estonia and Latvia can illustrate the lead of both countries in contrast to Lithuania till the crisis in 2008/09. Additionally, different basic values in all three Baltic States are responsible for the differen

10 lat Kompleksu Przemysłowego Keasong: krótka historia ostatniego projektu współpracy gospodarczej Półwyspu Koreańskiego

After fife month the special economic zone Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC) in North Korea was reopened again on 16 September 2013. By this way, it is the last remaining centrepiece of North–South economic cooperation on the Korean peninsula. Established during the period of “Sunshine policy” (1998 – 2007) and opened in 2003 the project was controversial from the first beginning. This article will give an overview about the history of the project explaining its economic importance for both sides and the peaceful development in Korea. While KIC was assumed to strengthen inter-Korean relations, to improve knowledge of North Koreans about market economy, competition and democracy at all, it failed. What remains is a possibility for North Korea to earn money from the South – and for South Korea a possibility to use the cheap labour force of the North. In contrast, all political attempts grasped at nothing. Therefore, also the last remaining relict of this era should be closed down finally.Po pięciu miesiącach, specjalna strefa ekonomiczna Kompleks Przemysłowy Keasong (ang. Kaesong Industrial Complex, KIC) w Korei Północnej została ponownie otwarta 16 września 2013 roku. Stanowi to ostatnią pozostałą oznakę współpracy gospodarczej pomiędzy północą o południem na Półwyspie Koreańskim. Ustanowiony w okresie „słonecznej polityki” (1998-2007) i otwarty w 2003 roku projekt było kontrowersyjny od samego początku. Niniejszy artykuł zawiera przegląd historii projektu, wyjaśniając jednocześnie jego znaczenie dla obu stron oraz dla pokojowego rozwoju w Korei. KIC miał wzmocnić relacje międzykoreańskie, poprawić wiedzę mieszkańców Korei Północnej na temat gospodarki rynkowej, konkurencji i demokracji, jednak zakończył się niepowodzeniem. Pozostała jedynie możliwość zarobienia przez Koreę Północną pieniędzy od Korei Południowej, a dla Korei Południowej – możliwość wykorzystywania taniej siły roboczej z Północy. Co więcej, wszystkie próby polityczne spełzły na niczym. Z tego względu, jedyny ostały relikt tej ery powinien zostać ostatecznie zamknięty

North Korea after the Nuclear Crisis: the Future of the Economic Reforms

A few years ago North Korea took the first steps to reform its economic system. These reforms have been characterised by the introduction of some basic monetisation into the economy and reduction of the role of government in setting prices and controlling the distribution system. The changes in North Korea's economic management and operational measures showed similarities to the processes other Asian transformation economies had gone through earlier. On the other hand the reforms may be seen as weak and insubstantial. After the nuclear crisis it must be asked whether North Korea has turned back into political isolation. A donor-based survival strategy, namely a combination of military threats and political advances to lure aid, and maybe even investment, to the country, was reactivated by the North Korean regime. Under the Six-Party Talks Agreement in February 2007 North Korea secured economic, energy and humanitarian assistance on a large scale. Therefore reversion or a slow-down of the reforms has to be feared.