REGIONAL INEQUALITIES IN SERBIA IN THE CONTEXT OF ......OF SERBIA 2015 /WEF/ 19 Pillar Rang (1-140)...
Transcript of REGIONAL INEQUALITIES IN SERBIA IN THE CONTEXT OF ......OF SERBIA 2015 /WEF/ 19 Pillar Rang (1-140)...
REGIONAL INEQUALITIES IN SERBIA IN THE CONTEXT OF STRUCTURAL REFORMS
Belgrade, Institute of Economic Sciences, 26th November, 2015.
Edvard Jakopin
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE“DEVELOPMENT, COMPETITIVENESS AND INEQUALITY IN EU AND
WESTERN BALKANS”
STARTING POINTS Hypothesis 1: Does growth in itself generate
inequalities? Does regional and social inequality create macroeconomic vulnerability?
Hypothesis 2: Do inequalities increase during the period of transition reforms?
Hypothesis 3: Has recession led to declining inequalities?
2
3
ЕU-15 ЕU-10 SEE
1990 100 100 100
2000 126 119 83
2008 146 168 127
2014 145 180 120
SEE: LAG, THE TREND OF INCREASING ECONOMIC GAP
Human Development Index
4
5
THE DEVELOPMENT POSITION OF SERBIA 2014.
1990=100 2000 2008 2014
Industry 42 51 46
Employment 82 79 67
Investment 23 40 30*
2014
GDP PPP(ЕU-28=100) 35
Employment rate /15-64/ 50%
Unemployment rate 17%
External debt(% GDP) 78,3%
Public debt(% GDP) 70,9%
INVESTMENTS
6
COMMODITIES FOREIGN TRADE DEFICIT
7
THE REFORM RISK -TRANSITION SPEED
8
The slowest reform in areas:1. Large scale
privatization2. Governance and
enterprise restructuring
3. Competition policy
IMPACT OF RECESSION ON THE SMEs SECTOR
9
SMEs Sector2007-2014:
GVA - fall of 16% Employment - drop
in by 16% Earnings - fall of
13% Number of medium
enterprises - fall in the by 17% (from 2,572 to 2,134)
DEMOGRAPHIC REGRESSION
10
The demographic imbalance 2002-2014Belgrade 99.176Raska-Rasina -7.559Backa -26.005Sumadija-Pomoravlje -28.239Srem -29.307Danube-Branichevo -38.831Nis-Toplica-Pirot -41.478Bor-Zajecar -48.968Zlatibor-Moravica -52.056Jablanica-Pcinja -58.992Macva-Kolubara -61.517Banat -74.839
EU-REGIONAL DISPROPORTION
11
12
TRANSITION&INEQUALITY
X:I decile 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Beograd 11:1 6,8:1 5,2:1 5,3:1 5,6:1 5,5:1 6,3:1 6,9:1 7,6:1
Vojvodina 14:1 12,6:1 12:1 8,3:1 7,8:1 7,7:1 9,2:1 9,7:1 10.4:1
Sum-West 8,5:1 9,2:1 7,2:1 6,9:1 7:1 6,3:1 8:1 8:1 8,9:1
South-East 8,6:1 7,5:1 7,1:1 7:1 6,4:1 6,1:1 6,6:1 7,2:1 8,4:1
Lorenz curve2014
SRBIJA - GINI 2014INCOME 0,38CONSUMPTION 0,26
X:I decile
BUG HUN ROM SRB ESP ITA
2008 12:1 5:1 13:1 8:1 11:1 9:1
2014 11:1 6:1 11:1 9:1 16:1 10:1
RECESSION&MIDDLE CLASS-INCOME
13
14
RECESSION&MIDDLE CLASS-CONSUMPTION
RECESSION&MIDDLE CLASS-REGIONAL ASPECT NUTS 2
15
INCOME CONSUMPTION
16
COMPOSITE INDEX OF SOCIAL COHESION(Srbija=100)
SOCIAL COHESION
TRANSITIONAL REGIONAL DIFFERENCES
17
SUCCESS RATE OF PRIVATIZATION DEVELOPMENTAL VULNERABILITY INDEX
RESTRUCTURING OF ECONOMY
18
MOST CRITICAL FIELDS OF SERBIA 2015 /WEF/
19
Pillar Rang (1-140)Protection of minority shareholders’ interests 1 138Burden of government regulation 1 136Extent of staff training 5 135Extent of market dominance 6 134Buyer sophistication 6 133Agricultural policy costs 6 132Country capacity to retain talent 7 140Country capacity to attract talent 7 139Cooperation in labor-employer relations 7 136Reliance on professional management 7 131Venture capital availability 8 130Nature of competitive advantage 11 138Extent of marketing 11 135Willingness to delegate authority 11 134Production process sophistication 11 133Capacity for innovation 12 132
20
ECONOMIC GROWTH BASED ON EXPORT
CONCLUSION /1/ Transitional growth was not function of reducing
regional and social inequalities in Serbia, which are constantly at a high level
High regional and social inequalities have increased macroeconomic vulnerability
Faster transition reforms affecting the increase in regional and social inequalities. In periods without reforms to reduce inequalities. More developed regions rapidly implement reforms, reduce inequality and increase social cohesion
The recession has reduced regional disparities21
CONCLUSION /2/Transitional development of regional and social inequalities in Serbia in the future will depend primarily: speed transition reforms (post-privatization
restructuring, structural reforms, investments)reforms in education and
regional models of endogenous growth and social inclusion. The focus of structural reforms will be areas where the greatest degree of inclusion gap: institutional reform, labor market reforms and reforms in education.
22