Social institutional factors of slow-down
the case of South-East European countries development


Drachkovich M.V.

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Assoc. Prof., Head of Marine Management and Logistics Department of University of Montenegro, Kotor, Montenegro rookie@t-com.me

Drachkovich V.D.

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Prof., Head of doctoral studies, Maritime faculty of Kotor, University of Montenegro, editor in chief of veso-mimo@t-com.me

Bilan Yu.V.

Associate Prof., University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland yuriy_bilan@yahoo.co.uk

ID of the Article: 6651


For citation:

Drachkovich M.V., Drachkovich V.D., Bilan Yu.V. Social institutional factors of slow-down: the case of South-East European countries development. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2017. No 4. P. 107-115




Abstract

Today widely spread is common assumption concerning importance of institutes and the role they play in economic development. However, there is also certain lack of full and systemic explanation of institutional behavior which is rather limited in the aspect of economic rationality. Man is a social creature. Also, he is an inseparable element of the social system. He is always ruled by own interests, habits, customs etc, all of which also have social nature of origin. Institutes in this context are vital elements of the social environments, their key function is to regulate and coordinate human behavior under conditions of social norms’ influence on people’s behavior. Institutes form specific mutual interpersonal relations, both formal and informal social mechanisms which limit human behavior and also behavior of organizations. Thus, institutes are limiting the choice. Neglecting institutions always has its negative influence on the efficiency of choice results. In the countries of South-East Europe real institutional changes have been ignored. Therefore, many anti-institutional forms of behavior have become rather explicit, essentially they are of alternative (shadow) nature and motivation. In this article the authors present their original vision on the formation of the factors within anti-democratic socioeconomic model of development, being formed throughout three decades of the transitive period in the post-socialist countries of the South-East Europe. An attempt is made to explain means and motives which facilitate realization of a rather paradoxical model of anti-development. The authors assume that without radical changes in the social field, namely, in the institutional sector, it will not be possible to overcome existing social and economic changes.


Keywords
institutes; opportunistic behavior; alternative institutes; neoliberalism; South-Eastern Europe

References

Назаренко С. В. Экономическая социология: конспект студента. М.: Финансовый университет, 2015. [Nazarenko S. V. (2015) Jekonomicheskaja sociologija: konspekt studenta [Economic sociology: abstract of the student.]. Moscow: Finansovyj universitet. (In Russ.)]

Bilan Y. Migration aspirations on the outskirts of Europe: social and economic dimensions // Transformations in Business & Economics. 2014. No. 13 (2B): 604–614.

Buchanan J. М., Robert D.T., Tullock G. (eds.) Toward a Theory of the Rent-Seeking Society. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. 1980.

Ciegis R., Dilius A., Mikalauskiene A. Evaluation of Economic Growth in Terms of Sustainability // Transformation in Business and Economics. 2015. No. 14(1–34): 105–126.

Delibasic M. The Post-socialist Transition Through the Prism of O. Williamson’s Insight // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2015. No. 10(1): 13–24.

Delibasic M. Hypothetical Matrix for Institutional Modeling of the Basis for Economic Development in the Countries of Southeast Europe // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2016. No. 12(2): 147–159.

Delibasic M., Grgurevic N. Framework for Researching the Modelling Possibilities of Institutional Behavior // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2014. No. 9(4): 65–75.

Draskovic V. (2010) Neoliberal Myths of Globalisation and Pseudo-Market Transition Economies // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2010. No. 6(11): 11–18.

Draskovic V., Draskovic M. (2012) Institutional Nihilism as a Basis for Anti-Development Policy // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2012. No. 8(1): 119–136.

Draskovic M., Bauk S., Delibasic M. (2016) Testing the Level and Factors of Institutional Rationality in Montenegro, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina // Economics and Sociology. 2016. No. 9(2): 22–40.

Draskovic M. Roots and Paradoxes of Neoliberal Apologetics // Economics & Sociology. 2016b. No. 9(1): 209–219. DOI: 10.14254/2071–789X.2016/9–1/14

Evans P. Predatory, Developmental, and Other Apparatuses: A Comparative Political Economy Perspective on the Third World State // Sociological forum. 1989. No. 4(4): 561–587.

Harstad R. M., Selten R. Bounded-Rationality Models: Task to Become Intel-lectually Competitive // Journal of Economic Literature. 2013. No. 51(2): 496–511.

Infante D., Smirnova J. Environmental Technology Choice in the Presence of Corruption and the Rule of Law Enforcement // Transformation in Business and Economics. 2016. No. 15(1–37): 214–228.

Kiausiene I., Streimikiene D. Significance of Institutional Factors for the Implementation of Gender Equality in the Labour Market // Transformations in Business and Economics. 2013. No. 12(3–30): 61–72.

Kolodko G. W. Transition to a Market. Why Gradualism Works and Radicalism Fails? // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2005. No. 1(1): 19–25.

Kornai J. (2006) The Great Transformation of Central Eastern Europe: Success and Disappointment – First Published // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2006. No. 2(4): 11–38.

Landes D. S. The wealth and poverty of nations: why some countries are so rich and some so poor. New York: WW Norton, 1998.

Levine R., Easterly W. Tropics, Germs, and Crops: How Endowments Influ-ence Economic Development // Journal of Monetary Economics. 2003. No. 50(1): 3–39.

Mencinger J. The Slovenian Transition Model // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2005. No. 1(1): 27–35.

Mesaric M. Neo-Liberalism Vs. Planning as a Institute of Socio-Economic Development // Montenegrin Journal of Economics. 2011. No. 7(2): 5–20.

Morselli A. Contemporary Capitalism between Human Action and Social Structure // Economics & Sociology. 2014. No. 7(2): 11–19. DOI: 10.14254/2071–789X.2014/7–2/2

North D. Institutions, Transaction Cost and Economic Growth // Economic Inwuiry. 1987. No. 25(3): 418–432.

North D. C., Walis J. J., Weingast B. R. Violence and Social Orders – A Concep-tual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge: The Syndicate of the Pres of the Cambridge University, 2009.

Scekic R., Draskovic M., Delibasic M. Neoliberalism in geoeconomics: the case of Southeast Europe, Journal of International Studies. 2016. No. 9(1): 66–75. DOI: 10.14254/2071–8330.2016/9–1/5

Smith A. An Enquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1981.

Streimikiene D., Bilan Y., Jasinskas E., Grikstaite R. Migration trends in Lithuania and other new EU member states // Transformations in Business & Economics. 2016. No. 15(1–37): 21–34.

Vriend N. J. Rational behavior and economic theory // Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 1996. No. 29(2): 263–285.

Content No 4, 2017