The social and economic dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy

The social and economic dimension of the The social and economic dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy European Neighbourhood Policy

Prof. Dr. Zoltán Cséfalvay Andrássy Gyula Deutschsprachige Universität Budapest

[email protected]


Prof. Dr. Zoltán Cséfalvay Andrássy Gyula Deutschsprachige Universität Budapest,

[email protected]

Stages of the regional economic integration

The long way from the first into the second

international division of labour

A mixture of development paths - the third


The European economic continental block is emerging

The stages of the regional economic integration (Béla Balassa)

Free Trade Zone: customs were abolished within the member-states of the zone, but every country has its own customs regime against the non-member-sates

Customs Union: customs were abolished within the member-states of the zone, and every country has the same customs regime against the non-member states


Single (Common) Market: customs were abolished within the

member-states of the zone, and every country has the same

customs regime against the non-member states, and there is a

free move of production factors (e. g. labour, capital,

information) within the member-states of the zone

Economic Union: customs were abolished within the

member-states of the zone, and every country has the same

customs regime against the non-member states, and there is a

free move of production factors (e. g. labour, capital,

information) within the member-states of the zone, and the

member-states develop a common framework for

economic policy (e. g. agriculture policy, competition

policy)


Regional economic integration

Free trade zone

Customs union

Single market

Economic union

Abolishing customs within the member-states of the zone

Common customs regime against the non-member states

Free move of production factors within the member-states of the zone (labour, capital, etc.)

Common framework for economic policy

1994: NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement),

member-states are Mexico, USA, Canada, works as a free

trade zone.

1991: MERCOSUR (Mercado Commun del Sur), member-

states are Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Bolivia,

works as a customs union.

1990: ANCOM (Andean Common Market), member-states are

Bolivia, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela, works as a

customs union.

Organisations for regional economic integration in America

1993: AFTA (ASEAN /Association of South East Asian Nations/

Free Trade Agreement), member states are Brunei, the

Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, works as

a free trade zone.

1989: APEC ( Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation), member-

states are Australia, Brunei, Chile, South Korea, USA, the

Philippines, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Canada, China,

Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Papua New-Guinea, Peru, New-

Zeeland, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam, after 2010 will

work as a free trade zone

APEC: A Perfect Excuse to Chat?

Organisations for regional economic integration in Asia

1951: Montanunion (European Coal and Steel Community,

ECSC): member-states are France, Germany, Italy, Belgium,

the Netherlands, Luxemburg,

1957 (Treaty of Rome): European Economic Community

(EEC)

1958 – works as a free trade zone

1968 – works as a customs union

1991 (Treaty of Maastricht): European Union – works as a

single market

1999 works as an economic union (e. g. the euro will have

become the common currency)

Organisations for regional economic integration in Europe

Effects of free trade – mutual gains resulting by abolishing the

trade barriers

Effects of single market – mutual gains resulting by producing

for a large market (economy of scale)

Effects of free mobility – mutual gains resulting by mobility of

the production factors (capital, labour, etc.)

Effects of solidarity – mutual gains resulting by financial

support the less developed countries.

Benefits joining the regional economic integration in Europe



[email protected]







First international division of labour Time: 1800-1970

inter-industry division of labour

Countries had specialised on products and braches with comparative advantages (David Ricardo)

EnglandIndustriegüter(z.B. Textil)

PortugalAgraprdukte(z.B. Wein)

Fertigprodukte

entwickelte LänderZentrum

Entwicklungsländer(Semi)Peripherie

Second international division of labour Time: 1975-1995

Driving forces: Lowering transaction cots via new transport and communication technologies

Widening the organisational structure of the companies on world-wide scale:

Centre - the highest level of the organisation: long-term planning, strategic management, overall control,

Semi-Periphery - the middle level of the organisation: highly automatic steeps of productions with high skilled workers

Periphery - the lowest level of organisation: standardised mass production with low skilled workers (assembly line production)

Second international division of labour

Time:1975-1995

intra-industry (intra-firm)

division of labour,

Driving forces: trans-national companies (TNCs)

How does it work? Shifting low value-added mass production in the peripheral regions of the world economy

Consequences: newly industrialized countries (NIC), emerging markets

entwickelteLänder

Zentrum

Entwick-lungsländer(Semi)Peri-

pherie

trans-natio-nale

Unter-neh-men

TechnologieKapital, Design

arbeitskosten-intensiveFertigung

Indonesien

USA

NIKE

Unternehmens-zentrale

Näherei

Fundamental change of the economic policy in the developing countries

Import-Substitution Industrialisation (ISI)

Raúl Prebisch (President of the National Bank in Argentina) in

the 1930th

Objective: Fostering home-grown industries which products

earlier were imported

Tools: exchange rates, customs for import, support of „enfant

industries“ with multiplication effects

Results: development of a home-grown industrial base, but

weak international competitiveness of the companies because

of the missing international competition.

Export-Led Growth (ELG):

New trends after 1980: Fostering the foreign direct

investments, especially those, which produce for export

Theoretical background: Washington Consensus (John

Williamson)

Results: export, GDP, and employment grow, but

modernisation remains regionally very restricted (missing

multiplication effects)

Fundamental change of the economic policy in the developing countries

Regional hierarchy of the world economy – Immanuel Wallerstein

Uneven - but regionally very differentiated - global expansion of market system since the 15th century

Stage in the economic development (and welfare), and Stage in the regional hierarchy and the structure of dependence

Zentrum

Semi-Peripherie

Peripherie

Außenarena

Brutto-inlands-produkt

pro Kopf

Abhängigkeit

The regional structure of the world economy 1800

Quelle: P. L. KNOX Quelle: P. L. KNOX u. S. A. MARSTON, u. S. A. MARSTON, 2001, S. 672001, S. 67



TRITRIADAD



Jack Welsh’s Paradigm

“The winners in these global games will be those

who can put together the world’s best in design, manufacturing, research, execution, and

marketing on the largest scale.

Rarely are all of these elements found in one country or on one continent.”

Welch, Jack F. Jr. (1987) Evolving Industrial Alliances.

The Bridge, 17(4), S. 10.

Nordamerika Westeuropa

Hinterland:Latein-

Amerika

Japan

Hinterland:Ostmittel-europa,

Mediterra-neum

HinterlandSüdost-asien

T R I A D E

The power of the triad – Kenichi Ohmae

Hanoi(Vietnam)

Rayong/Samutprakarn (Thailand)

KualaLumpur

(Malaysia)Manila

(Philippinen)

Jakarta(Indonesien)

Chiba(Japan)

ASIEN

Toluca(Mexiko)

Curitiba(Brasilien)

LATEINAMERIKA

Kairo(Egypt)

Rosslyn(Süd-Afrika)

AFRIKA

Spartanburg(Virginia)

Palo AltoOxnard

Newbury Park(Kalifornien)

OxfordGoodwoodHams Hall(England)

Berlin

BerlinLepzig

Eisenach

BAYERN

OST-DEUTSCH-

LAND

EUROPA

USA

München

München, DingolfingRegensburg, Wackersdorf

Landshut, Steyr

FORSCHUNG-ENTWICKLUNG

KOMPLEXEPRODUKTION

MONTAGE-ARBEIT

MITNIEDRI-

GEMMEHR-WERT

Technologie

Produktteile

Nordamerika Westeuropa

Hinterland:Latein-

Amerika

Japan

Hinterland:Ostmittel-europa,

Mediterra-neum

HinterlandSüdost-asien

T R I A D E

ESRC (2003) ’Globalizing’ Regional Development: A Global Production Network Perspecticve. GNP Working Paper 3, May, ESRC Research Project R000238535: Making the Connections: Global Production Networks in Europe and East Asia. http://www.art.man.ac.uk/Geog/gpn/pdfs/gpnwp3.pdf

http://www.art.man.ac.uk/Geog/gpn/pdfs/gpnwp3.pdf

http://www.art.man.ac.uk/Geog/gpn/pdfs/gpnwp3.pdf



[email protected]







The role of a given country in the international division of labour

will be determined by the mode of transition from fordist-

type mass production into post-fordist type flexible

production and regulation.

Countries are integrated in continental blocks according their

mode of transition

Regionally the continental blocks organised in a centre-

periphery pattern

Third international division of labour

FLEXIBILITY

in the production (intern flexibility)

in the economic policy (extern flexibility)

Flexibility in the production: better use of time and space,

such as lean production, just in time, total quality control, total

quality management, CAD/CAM, etc.)

Flexibility in the economic policy: privatisation, deregulation,

liberalisation

außer den Betrieben

in den Betrieben

Keynesianismus Neoliberalismus

Taylorismus schlanke ProduktionFLEXIBEL

INFLEXIBEL

post-fordistische

Entwicklungs-pfade

(Kombinationen)

Mode of transition from fordist-type mass production into post-fordist type flexible production and regulation – ALAIN LIPIETZ

Kalmarism = low flexibility in economic policy (welfare state by regulation of wages via mass corporations) + high flexibility in production

German model = low flexibility in economic policy (welfare state by regulation of wages via industries) + high flexibility in production

Toyotism = low flexibility in economic policy (welfare state by regulation of wages via companies) + high flexibility in production

Neotaylorism = high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) +low flexibility in production (taylorism)

Flexibilität in den Betrieben

Fle

xibi

litä

t au

ßer

den

Bet

rieb

en

Neo

libe

rali

smu

s

K

eyn

esia

nis

mu

s

FO

RD

ISM

US

Verhandlungen zwischen Arbeitgebern und Arbeitsnehmern Individuum Unternehmen Branche Gesellschaft

Kalmarismus(z.B. Schweden)

deutsches Modell(z.B. Deutschland

Toyotismus(z.B. Japan)

Neotaylorismus(z.B. USA,

Großbritannien)

TAYLORISMUS

Mode of transition from fordist-type mass production into post-fordist type flexible production and regulation in the developed countries

primitive (‘bloody’) Taylorism: low flexibility in production (taylorism) + high flexibility in

economic policy the lowest level of organisation - standardised mass

production with low skilled workers (assembly line production)

peripheral Fordism low flexibility in production (taylorism) + high flexibility in

economic policy the lowest level of organisation - standardised mass

production with low skilled workers (assembly line production)

the middle level of the organisation: highly automatic steeps of productions with high skilled workers

Mode of transition from fordist-type mass production into post-fordist

type flexible production and regulation in the developing countries

Flexibilität in den Betrieben

Fle

xib

ilit

ät a

uß

er d

en B

etri

eben

N

eoli

bera

lism

us

Key

ensi

anis

mu

s

FO

RD

ISM

US

Verhandlungen zwischen Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern Individuum Unternehmen Branche Gesellschaft

Kalmarismus(z.B. Schweden)

deutsches Modell(z.B. Deutschland)

Toyotismus(z.B. Japan)

Neotaylorismus(z.B. USA,

Groß-Britannien)

TAYLORISMUS

peripherer Fordismus(z.B. Mexiko, Portugal)

primitiver Taylorismus(z.B. Malaysia, Ungarn)

ZENTRUM: Oberste, mittlere, und unterste Ebene der tayloristischen Arbeitsorganisation

SEMIPERIPHERIE Mittlere und unterste Ebene der tayloristischen Arbeitsorganisation

(SEMI)PERIPHERIE unterste Ebene der tayloristischen Arbeitsorganisation

Kalmarism = welfare state by regulation of wages via mass corporations + flexibility in production

German model = welfare state by regulation of wages via industries + flexibility in production

Toyotism = welfare state by regulation of wages via companies + flexibility in production

Neotaylorism = high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism)

Peripheral Fordism: high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism) + highly automatic steps of productions with high skilled workers and standardised mass production with low skilled workers

Primitve (bloody) taylorism: high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism) + standardised mass production with low skilled workers

International division of labour

First international

division of labour

(Industrialisation)

Second international

division of labour(Fordism)


(Post-Fordism, Globalisation)

Main question

What does the country produce?

What does the country do in the process of production?

What model does the country use in the transition to produce?

Type of division of labour

inter-industry division of labour

intra-industry (intra-firm) division of labour

Organised within the continental blocs

International trade

Between countries

Between countries but organised by transnational companies

Between continental blocs



[email protected]






The European economic continental block is

emerging

entwickelteLänderZentrum

Entwicklungs-länder(Semi)Peripherie

trans-natio-nale

Unter-neh-men

Technologie,Kapital, Design

arbeitsintesiveFertigung

Schweden(Kalmarismus)

Deutschland(deutsches Modell)

Groß-Britannien(Neotaylorismus)

Portugal(peripherer Fordismus)

Ungarn(peripherer Fordismus?)

Spanien(Neotaylorismus)

Bulgarien(primitiver Taylorismus)

Slowakei(primitiver Taylorismus)

KONTINENTALES BLOCK

Technologie- und Kapitalfluß

The role of a given country in the international division of labour will be determined by the mode of transition from fordist-type mass production into post-fordist type flexible production and regulation.

Countries are integrated in continental blocks according their mode of transition

Regionally the continental blocks organised in a centre-periphery pattern


European economic continental block

Zones Countries according their mode of transition from fordist-type

mass production into post-fordist type flexible production and

regulation

Centre Kalmarism and German model (Germany, Austria, France, North Italy, Sweden, Denmark): low flexibility in economic policy (welfare state by regulation of wages via mass corporations or industries) + high flexibility in production (high stock of human capital)

First

zone

Neotaylorism (Great-Britain, Ireland, Spain): high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism)

Second

zone

On the way from primitve taylorism to peripheral fordism (Portugal, Greece, South Italy): high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism) + mostly standardised mass production with low skilled workers, but also some highly automatic steps of productions with high skilled workers

European economic continental blockZones Countries according their mode of transition from fordist-type

mass production into post-fordist type flexible production and

regulation

Third zone

Primitive (bloody) talyorism (Central and Eastern European accession countries 2004): high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism) + standardised mass production with low skilled workers

Fourth zone

On the way into a primitive (bloody) taylorism (Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine): high flexibility in economic policy (liberalisation) + low flexibility in production (taylorism) + standardised mass production with low skilled workers

Fifth zone

On the way into a primitive (bloody) taylorism and row material production (Maghreb-states, states involved in European Neighbourhood Policy): low flexibility in economic policy (and strong influence of state) + high reservoir of low skilled workers for standardised mass production + row material production


Prof. Dr. Zoltán Cséfalvay Andrássy Gyula Deutschsprachige Universität Budapest

[email protected]

TTHANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND HANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION!ATTENTION!

Documents

The social and economic dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy