著者

小山 洋司

出版者

日本EU学会

雑誌

日本EU学会年報 (ISSN:18843123)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2020, no.40, pp.175-198, 2020-05-30 (Released:2022-05-30)

参考文献数

33

---

In all new EU member states from Central and Eastern Europe except Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia their total populations have been decreasing since their EU accession. Especially striking are cases of Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Bulgaria. A natural increase in population turned negative already in the 1990s in all the countries, but a decrease in total population in these four countries can be mostly ascribed to a massive emigration to advanced EU member states. As the EU has a principle of free mobility of people labor migration within the region is quite natural, but a too rapid outflow of people has been giving serious influences on the economic development of sending countries. In Lithuania, for example, during 27 years from 1992 through 2019 its population has decreased by about a quarter (24.6%). As an aging society with fewer children in parallel with such a too rapid decrease in population is causing a lack of skilled workers and a fear that the pension budget could not be maintained in the future, this situation is taken by many people with a sense of crisis. Such a phenomenon affects also host countries. They show great consideration for migrant workers’ social integration, but it takes a time and a certain cost. If foreign workers flow into advanced EU member states at a too rapid pace, it might cause friction in their society. As for international labor migration, a majority of studies so far have focused on host countries, but this paper considers the problem from a standpoint of sending countries. It examines causes of such an intense emigration from Lithuania, taking into account differences from the case of Estonia where emigration is not so intense. Larger income inequality within the country has been a key factor urging people to emigrate. It seems that a series of reforms after the system change, especially the Lithuanian government’s desperate efforts to enter the Eurozone have caused strains on the society. A decrease in income inequality in the country would require an effective taxation reform and other measures. Assistance to new EU member states from the EU has been directed mainly to the improvement of infrastructure in poorer regions, but such assistance has not brought a creation of sufficient jobs in peripheral member states. It would be better for policies makers as well as researchers to pay more attention to challenges of development of human capital in peripheral member states.

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

ロシア・東欧学会

雑誌

ロシア・東欧研究 (ISSN:13486497)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2013, no.42, pp.88-102, 2013 (Released:2015-05-28)

参考文献数

26

被引用文献数

1

---

Slovenia is the richest country in Central and Eastern Europe. The country joined the European Union in May 2004. Having satisfied the Maastricht criteria earlier than any other new EU member states, the country joined the Euro-zone in January 2007 and then served as the EU Presidency successfully in the first half of 2008. In that sense, Slovenia was the best performer among the post-socialist countries. During the period 2005–2008 the country accomplished a high economic growth. Since the capital market in this country had only a short history, companies depended mainly on debt financing. Many banks were competing with each other for market share. Slovenian banks borrowed a huge amount of funds on international wholesale financial markets and provided companies with cheap loans. In addition to core business activities, companies actively invested in non-core business activities, creating a real estate boom. Due to the Lehman shock, international financial markets suddenly became tight. Slovenian banks became unable to borrow funds from the wholesale markets. Domestic banks, in turn, were obliged to decrease credits to companies and households. Moreover, in the early 2009 external demands, especially demands on the EU markets decreased remarkably, and correspondingly exports decreased. Consequently, the domestic productions decreased. The GDP growth rate recorded –7.8 percent in 2009. Thanks to some increase in exports to the Euro-zone, the economy picked up only in the second quarter of 2010. In 2011, however, affected by the credit uncertainty in the Euro-zone, the Slovenian economy fell into a double-dip depression and further a serious crisis. Many companies went bankrupt, and the banking sector came to have a huge amount of non-performing loans. The type of the Slovenian crisis is different from that of Greece or Cyprus. First, Slovenia had a relatively sound budget until 2008. The country has not aimed to be a tourism country like Greece and Cyprus. Instead, the country had competitive manufacturing industries and her trade and current account deficits were small until recently. Second, the second wave of privatization started in 2006 mainly based on the MBO method, and Slovenian banks financed the MBO. Unfortunately, this move coincided with the Lehman shock. Third, the proportion of foreign-owned banks in the banking sector was small. Domestic capitals account for about 60 percent of the banking sector, but the state has control over major banks. In other Central and East European countries foreign-owned banks have been predominant, and therefore their parent banks have managed to support subsidiaries. In the case of Slovenia, in contrast, the government had to inject capitals to the banks repeatedly to protect the banking system, having negative influence on the state budget. In 2013 the credit uncertainty over Cyprus gave rise to concerns about Slovenia. Outside specialists think that there is no way other than asking the Troika (the EU, the European Central Bank and the IMF) for help, but the government is struggling hard to overcome the crisis by itself without relying on rescue by the Troika. This paper examines why this country fell into such a serious economic crisis.

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

比較経済体制学会

雑誌

比較経済研究 (ISSN:18805647)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.54, no.2, pp.2_39-2_42, 2017 (Released:2017-08-08)

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

The Japanese Association for Russian and East European Studies

雑誌

ロシア・東欧研究 (ISSN:13486497)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2009, no.38, pp.60-71, 2009 (Released:2011-10-14)

参考文献数

26

被引用文献数

1

---

With the disintegration of former Yugoslavia, Macedonia became an independent state. Similar to other Republics of the former Yugoslavia, Macedonia had to carry out double transitions, i.e. transition to a market economy and transition from a regional economy to a national economy. For a newly independent small country to survive the environment of market economy, it is required to settle domestic conflicts, establish good relationship with neighboring countries and secure economic independence. Western Balkan countries, which have experienced ethnic conflicts and still have domestic ethnic problems, would not be assured of their survival as long as they remain outside the European Union. This paper examines how Macedonia has been tackling the above mentioned problems, proceeding toward EU accession in the context of the EU’s Stabilization and Association Process. This paper stresses the following points: First, domestic conflicts between the Macedonian population and the Albanian population was settled for the time being by the Ohrid Framework Agreement in 2001, but the situation is still precarious. Their peaceful co-existence should be consolidated with support from the international community, especially the EU. Second, at the turn of the 21st century the relationship with its neighboring countries, except Greece, has been significantly improved. As Greece is the nearest member country of the EU, it is urgently necessary for Macedonia to improve its relationship with this country. Regardless of the diplomatic conflict over the name of the country with Greece, the economic relation between both countries is becoming closer. However, as long as Greece opposes, Macedonia will not be able to enter into its accession negotiations with EU. It seems that a compromise between both countries in this regard is not impossible. Third, CEFTA 2006, a multilateral free trade agreement, is very important for Macedonia. Western Balkan countries are required to endeavor to make this agreement effectively function in order to increase intra-regional trade, attract more FDI and prepare for their EU accession. Fourth, Macedonia is facing a problem of structural fragility of its economy. Its external debt and domestic public debt are not at so critical levels. However, the unemployment is very high and its informal sector has reached an abnormally big scale. It is urgently necessary for the country to increase jobs. Also the problem of chronic trade deficit should be overcome.

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

ロシア・東欧学会

雑誌

ロシア・東欧研究 (ISSN:13486497)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2005, no.34, pp.171-173, 2005 (Released:2010-05-31)

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

ロシア・東欧学会

雑誌

ソ連・東欧学会年報 (ISSN:03867226)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1990, no.19, pp.80-87, 1990 (Released:2010-05-31)

参考文献数

19

被引用文献数

2 1

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

ロシア・東欧学会

雑誌

ロシア・東欧学会年報 (ISSN:21854645)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1999, no.28, pp.117-125, 1999 (Released:2010-05-31)

参考文献数

23

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

高知大学経済学会

雑誌

高知論叢. 社会科学 (ISSN:03888886)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.36, pp.187-219, 1989-11-20

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

神奈川大学

雑誌

商経論叢 (ISSN:02868342)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.42, no.3, pp.143-162, 2006-12

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

比較経済体制学会

雑誌

社会主義経済学会会報 (ISSN:18839789)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1987, no.25, pp.18-21, 1987-10-20 (Released:2009-07-31)

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

比較経済体制学会

雑誌

社会主義経済学会会報 (ISSN:18839789)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1982, no.19, pp.21-24, 1982-03-01 (Released:2009-07-31)

著者

小山 洋司 富山 栄子

出版者

事業創造大学院大学

雑誌

事業創造大学院大学紀要 (ISSN:21854769)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.10, no.1, pp.1-17, 2019-04

---

EUの新規加盟国の中でも周縁部のバルト三国とバルカンの加盟国からEU先進 国への人口流出が激しく、それに伴い、国内では過疎化も進行している。本論文 はルーマニアの事例を取り上げ、第二次大戦後の人口動態を概観したうえで、こ の国が開放経済の下で短期間に市場経済移行を実施することは非常に大きな困難 を伴ったと論じた。産業構造は大きく変化したが、国内で十分な雇用を生み出す ことができず、労働者の外国移住を招いた。外国で働く移住者の送金は、経常収 支赤字の縮小や残された家族の消費生活の向上という形でルーマニア経済の発展 に寄与したが、国内の投資拡大には繋がっていない。外国移住は国内の失業率低 下に寄与したものの、頭脳流出という負の側面も見逃せない。農村の過疎化も著 しく進んだが、この点での政府の対策はまったく不十分であったことを論じた。

著者

小山 洋司

出版者

比較経済体制学会

雑誌

比較経済研究 (ISSN:18805647)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.47, no.2, pp.2_39-2_49, 2010 (Released:2011-02-18)

参考文献数

32

---

中東欧の経済危機の諸相を概観したうえで,バルト諸国,とりわけラトビアに焦点を当て,経済危機の原因を考察する.2004年の EU 加盟の前から賃金が急上昇した.金融面では北欧の銀行が進出し,シェア競争をし,消費ブームを煽った.すでに2005年には経済は過熱の兆候を見せていたが,政府の対応が遅れた.2007年春に引き締め政策に転じ,同年12月に経済は不況に陥ったうえに,2008年 9 月のリーマン・ショックが追い打ちをかけた.