INNOVATIVENESS OF BELARUSIAN ECONOMY THROUGH THE PRISM OF ITS COMPETITIVE POSITION IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE
AbstractThe main purpose of this study is to answer the question of how innovative Belarusian economy is. Its innovativeness has been assessed through an in-depth analysis of Belarus’ position in international trade, especially in high- and medium-high-technology goods, on the back of the assumption that any competitive advantages possessed in them testify to the economy’s high innovativeness. The analysis of the dynamics of long-term revealed comparative advantages in Belarusian foreign trade by using Balassa’s RCA methodology and covering the years 2000-2014, has shown that the country was generally characterized by low innovativeness, as evidenced by the possession of such advantages only in trade in goods of relatively low technological intensity (medium-low technology). Meanwhile, in hi-tech goods (high and medium-high technology), Belarus did not have any (or only had relatively small) long-term revealed comparative advantages. Moreover, Belarus’ competitiveness in international trade deteriorated over that period, not only regarding high and medium-high technology goods but also in foreign trade overall. This seems to be, amongst others, the consequence of low efficiency of the country’s current innovation policy.
Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.
Arrow, K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention. New York: Princeton University Press.
Atkinson, R. D., & Ezell, S. J. (2012). Innovation Economics. The Race for Global Advantage. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalization and ‘revealed’ comparative advantage. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 33.
Balassa, B. (1989). ‘Revealed’ comparative advantage revisited. In B. Balassa (Ed.), Comparative advantage, trade policy and economic development. New York: New York University Press.
Bikár, M., & Kmet’ko, M. (2015). The Economy Development in Countries Created the Euroasian Economic Union. International Journal of Science Commerce and Humanities, 3(2), 85-103.
Dabrowski, M. (2016). Belarus at a crossroads. Bruegel Policy Contribution, 2. Retrieved from http://bruegel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/pc_2016_02.pdf
Dobrinsky, R., Adarov, A., Bornukova, K., Havlik, P., Hunya, G., Kruk, D., & Pindyuk, O. (2016). The Belarus Economy: The Challenges of Stalled Reforms. wiiw Research Report, 413, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies.
Drucker, P. (1992). Managing for the future. New York: Truman Talley/E.P. Dutton.
Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (Eds.). (2015). Global Innovation Index 2015. Effective Innovation Policies for Development, Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization.
Egorov, A. (2014). Features of the Belarusian Economic Model. Retrieved from http://www.tstefaniuk.uph.edu.pl/zeszyty/archiwalne/101-2014_3.pdf.
European Union. (2014). Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014, Brussels: European Commission.
Falkowski, K. (2013). Międzynarodowa konkurencyjność gospodarek Białorusi, Rosji i Ukrainy [International Competitiveness of the Economies of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine], Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics Press.
Falkowski, K. (2016). Skuteczność polityk innowacyjnych krajów Europy Wschodniej w kontekście poziomu konkurencyjności ich gospodarek w handlu międzynarodowym [The effectiveness of Eastern European countries’ innovation policies with view to their economies’ competitiveness in international trade]. International Business and Global Economy, 35(1), 295-308.
Freinkman, L., Bakanova, M., & Sidarenka, M. (2010). Belarus: Trade Performance and Competitiveness. Belarus Economic Policy Notes, 2. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410061
Hämäläinen, T. J. (2003). National Competitiveness and Economic Growth. The Changing Determinants of Economic Performance in the World Economy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Hatzichronoglou, T. (1997). Revision of the high technology sector and product classification. STI Working Papers 1997/2. OECD/GD 97(216). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Havlik, P., Astrová, V., & Pindyuk, O. (2012). Trade Integration in the CIS: Alternate Options, Economic Effects and Policy Implications for Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine. wiiw Research Report, 381, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies.
Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3-42.
Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). ISIC Rev. 3 Technology intensity definition. Classification of manufacturing industries into categories based on R&D intensities. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/sti/ind/48350231.pdf.
Romer, P. (1989). Human Capital and Growth: Theory and Evidence. NBER Working Paper, 3173.
Schwab, K. (Ed.). (2016). The Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017, Geneva: World Economic Forum.
Shirov, A. A, Sabchishina, K. E., & Potapenko, V. V. (2016). Development of the Belarusian Economy. Problems of Economic Transition, 58(6), 487-498.
Siggel, E. (2006). International Competitiveness and Comparative Advantage: A Survey and a Proposal for Measurement. Journal of Industry, Competitiveness and Trade, 6.
Stern, S., Porter, M. E., & Furman, J. L. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31.
Vollrath, T. (1991). A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage. Review of World Economics, 127(2), 265-280.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 - CC BY 3.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
email@example.com, www.iseic.cz, ojs.journals.cz