Published by De Gruyter Oldenbourg

Volume 63 Issue 3

Issue of Review of Economics

Contents
Journal Overview

April 19, 2016

Deal or No Deal? Consensual Arrangements as an Instrument of European Competition Policy

Oliver Budzinski, Björn A. Kuchinke

Page range: 265-292

Abstract

Roughly during the last decade, European Competition Policy has undergone a series of fundamental changes. All four areas - cartel policy, merger policy, abuse control, and state aid control - have been subject to a modernization process, which led to a focus on analysing the effects of individual cases and established a tendency towards deciding each case on its individual merits. These changes can be understood as a move away from rule-based competition policy towards a case-by-case approach. The case-by-case approach especially includes consensual arrangements, so-called ‘deals’ between the competition authority and business companies. Therefore, this paper will discuss the pros and cons of ‘deals’ as an instrument of (European) competition policy. The paper′s central focus lies on the economic analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of using consensual arrangements as a relevant instrument of European competition policy. With respect to European competition policy, we conclude that we need to issue a note of caution. From an economic perspective, an expansion of consensual elements necessarily walks hand in hand with a continual weakening of the protection of competition. Consumer welfare will not benefit from expanding the role and importance of consensual arrangements as a means of European competition policy.

April 19, 2016

EWU-Krisenmanagement: Warum die Politik auf dem richtigen Weg ist

Werner Becker, Horst Löchel

Page range: 293-313

Abstract

With troubles in the European Monetary Union (EMU) showing great persistence, the emergency measures and ad-hoc crisis management of European authorities has been subject to harsh criticism. The current fierce debate among economists and the broad public has given rise to two camps advocating fundamentally different approaches how to exit the sustained crisis. While according to the Integrationists′ view, the only viable way to get rid of pressing debt problems and to restore confidence in the Euro area lies in a common guarantee for national debt obligations, so-called Minimalists advocate a strict return to the cornerstones of the Maastricht Treaty, in particular strict compliance with the debt and deficit limits laid out by the Treaty as well as a credible application of the ‚no-bail-out‘ rule. However, in their pure form, both strategies do not serve for a timely and effective crisis management as they either require a level of supranational integration that - given the still prevalent Westphalian order - cannot be attained in the short run nor is it on the agenda of European policy, or essentially deny the significant flaws within the EMU architecture that failed to prevent current fiscal woes. The current crisis management of European authorities has followed neither of the two extremes but has taken a viable middle-of-the-road approach that resulted in useful and necessary repairs to the institutional architecture of the Euro area, most notably the establishment of the commonly guaranteed stability mechanisms EFSF and ESM as well as the first steps taken towards a European banking union. Hence, in contrast to most observers, we argue that the European authorities, by operating a prudent stepby- step approach, are on the right track towards solving the current crisis. As a result, European Central Bank could move back to its original approach of monetary policy.

April 19, 2016

German Unification: Lessons for Korea?

Ulrich Blum

Page range: 314-338

Abstract

We analyze the similarities and differences in terms of the demographic, social, political and economic situation of the two Germanies and the two Koreas before unification. Based on the German experience, we inquire whether there is room for economic policy unification strategies. An important issue is the degree of international openness which, under “stone-age” type conditions, is much lower in North Korea than it ever was in East Germany. This may create additional adjustment costs, especially if institutions change. We go on by showing how transition and integration interact in a potential unification process based on the World Bank Revised Minimum Standard Model (RMSM) and the Salter-Swan-Meade model. In doing so, we relate the macro and external impacts on an open economy to its micro-sectoral structural dynamics. Theoretical findings and evidence from Germany suggest that limits to accelerating unification from an economic perspective are important factors to take into account. We then consider unification as an “investment” and track down the (by-and-large immediate to medium-term) costs and the (by-and-large long-term) benefits of retooling a retarded communist economy. We conclude that, from a South-Korean perspective, Korean unification will become much more expensive than German unification. This may pose severe political and strategic problems.

April 19, 2016

Dutch Disease – Ökonomische Prozesse und Implikationen für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit

Klaus Liebig, Gerhard Ressel, Ulrike Rondorf

Page range: 339-364

Abstract

We analyze some potential adverse macroeconomic side-effects of aid transfers: Real appreciation of the recipient′s currency may impair the aggregate output via crowding-out productive export sectors, the so-called Dutch Disease. We use simplified balance sheets to elucidate the effects of four typical combinations of the following actions: The government may or may not spend the value of the aid transfer for nontradable goods. The central bank may or may not sell the respective reserves. If the loss of competitiveness induced by the appreciation is over-compensated by the improved productivity induced by the use of the transfer, then there is no need to worry about the Dutch Disease.

April 19, 2016

Der Nutzen der Mesoökonomie für ökonomische Paradigmenbildung am Beispiel der Agrarökonomie

Stefan Mann

Page range: 365-376

Abstract

In order to check the potentials of mesoeconomic research, the example of agricultural economics serves as a case in point to look for advances which contributed to progress in general economic science. In the literature of economic history, the pioneer work by J. H. v. Thünen catches the eye, while T. W. Schultz is a classic Agricultural Economist who won the Nobel Prize. A special section is devoted to mathematical progress within Agricultural Economics and the role of agricultural economists in welfare economics. It is concluded that a high added value can be generated through restricting empirical analyses to a particular sector.

About this journal

Welcome! As of 2016 the Review of Economics as well as all other journals of Lucius and Lucius Verlagsgesellschaft are published by De Gruyter Oldenbourg.

Aims and Scope
The Review of Economics (Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftswissenschaften) is a peer-reviewed general interest journal and publishes articles from all fields of economics.
Only articles with a strong policy focus are considered for publication. The Review of Economics will consider papers that are based on (i) a well defined theoretical model (ii) an empirical analysis or (iii) an experimental or (iv) an evidence-based framework.
The Review of Economics is also highly interested in survey articles on important policy issues.
Since the Review of Economics intends to deliver a forum for policy contributions and to influence the public debate we guarantee a quick and efficient referee process (the initial publication decision will be made within a maximum of 90 days). The editors may decide to publish papers without a referee process whenever authors send their submissions together with the referee reports and the decision letter of the previous submission and explain how they reacted to the reports. Accepted articles will be pre-published on the internet page of the journal as soon as they are accepted. Because the Review of Economics is not an e-Journal all articles also appear in a regular print version with some delay.

Partner Journal
Czech Journal of Economics and Finance

The Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (ISSN 0015-1920) is an English-language, double-blind refereed academic journal published in Prague since 1951. It devotes special attention to monetary economics, public finance, financial economics, and international economics, but it is open to high-quality papers from all fields of modern economics. The editors prefer empirically oriented papers, but do not exclude review articles or theoretical contributions provided that they are of high quality and relevant to the journal's aims.