Sustainable Growth of EU Economies and Baltic Context : Characteristics and Modelling

• Autorzy: Girts Karnitis , Edvins Karnitis
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The united general growth strategy for all EU Member States, a common economic and political vision as well as location in the same geographic region provides a necessary basis for the benchmarking modelling of economies. The main objective of this study is determination of the functional regularities and drivers of the growth of EU economies and the context of the Baltic States in line with the general trend of the EU, as well as development of the growth model, which can be used for sustainable planning and prediction. Analysis of several regularly published analytical indexes suggests a thesis on innovation as the real basic driving force for EU economies and outlines Innovation Performance Index, which have a very strong compliance with the economic growth of particular country. At the same time study of the data set and methodology of the Index indicates space for further optimization. By use of several linear regression tools the growth model was created. It is based on three hard independent statistical indicators (predictors) only; of course, these indicators is a peak of a complex pyramid. Despite of the simplicity of the model, the long-term correlation of fitted values with the real GDP per capita is extremely strong 0.961 - 0.987). (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Economic indicators; Gross domestic product (GDP); Economic planning; Innovations; Data analysis; Mathematical models

PL

Wskaźniki ekonomiczne; Produkt krajowy brutto (PKB); Planowanie gospodarcze; Innowacje; Analiza danych; Modele matematyczne

• Czasopismo: Journal of International Studies
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 10
• Numer: nr 1
• Strony: 209--224

Twórcy

autor

Girts Karnitis

• University of Latvia Riga, Latvia

autor

Edvins Karnitis

• University of Latvia Riga, Latvia; Cross-sectoral Communication Centre Riga, Latvia

Bibliografia

• Balkyte, A., & Tvaronavičiene, M. (2010). Perception of competitiveness in the context of sustainable development: facets of "sustainable competitiveness". Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 341-365.
• Barzdins J., Barzdins G., Apsitis K., & Sarkans U. (1993). Towards Efficient Inductive Synthesis of Expressions from Input/Output Examples. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Algorithmic Learning Theory, 59-72.
• Bilan, Y., Strielkowski, W., Karbach, R., & Mentel, G. (2017). SECURE DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTRY AND COMPETITIVENESS ISSUES: CASE OF GERMANY'S ENERGY SECURITY. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 6(3), 329-342. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2017.6.3(1)
• Ciocanel, A. B., & Pavelescu, F. M. (2015). Innovation and competitiveness in European context. Procedia Economics and Finance, 32, 728-737.
• Čirjevskis, A. (2016). Sustainability in information and communication technologies'industry: innovative ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities perspectives. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 6(2), 211-226. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2016.6.2(2)
• CPI (2016). Corruption Perceptions Index. Retrieved from: http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview.
• Crespo, N. F., & Crespo, C. F. (2016). Global innovation index: Moving beyond the absolute value of ranking with a fuzzy-set analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5265-5271.
• DB (2016). Doing Business. Retrieved from: http://www.doingbusiness.org/.
• Dirzyte, A., Rakauskiene, O. G., & Servetkiene, V. (2016). Household income and satisfaction with life: cognitiveemotional impact paradox. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(2), 198-210.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.2(7)
• Divya, K. H., & Devi, V. R. (2014). A Study on predictors of GDP: Early Signals. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 375-382.
• Dobele, L., Grinberga-Zalite, G., & Kelle, L. (2015). SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: SCENARIOS FOR PROMOTION OF SOCIAL INNOVATION IN LATVIA. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 5(2), 149-158. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2015.5.2(2)
• Donoso, J. F. (2017). A simple index of innovation with complexity. Journal of Informetrics, 11(1), 1-17.
• DS 2016. Digital Scoreboard. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-scoreboard.
• EC 2009. GDP and Beyond; Measuring Progress in a Changing World. COM(2009) 433 final.
• EC 2010a. Europe 2020; a Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. COM(2010) 2020 final.
• EC 2010b. Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative; Innovation Union. COM(2010) 546 final.
• EC 2013. Measuring Innovation Output in Europe: Towards a New Indicator. SWD(2013) 325 final.
• EC 2017. White Paper on the Future of Europe; Reflections and Scenarios for the EU27 by 2025. Retrieved from: https://europa.eu/european-union/sites/europaeu/files/whitepaper_en.pdf.
• EIS 2016. European Innovation Scoreboard. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/factsfigures/scoreboards_lv.
• EU 2016. Recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the Establishment of National Productivity Boards. ECOFIN 590 UEM 248.
• Eurobarometer 2016. Special Eurobarometer 451. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/General/index.
• Eurostat 2017. European Statistics. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat.
• Fioramonti, L. (2014). The world's most powerful number: An assessment of 80 years of GDP ideology. Anthropology Today, 30(2), 12-15.
• GCI 2016. The Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017. Retrieved from: http://weforum.org/reports/the-globalcompetitiveness-report-2016-2017-1.
• GEM 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Retrieved from: http://www.gemconsortium.org/.
• GII 2016. Global Innovation Index. Retrieved from: https://www.globalinnovationindex.org
• HDR 2015. Human Development Report 2015. Retrieved from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/2015-report.
• Horváthová, Z., Křítková, S., & Tcukanova, O. (2016). Housing policy and security in the eu: a case study of the Czech Republic. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 5(4), 601-610. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2016.5.4(12)
• Høyland, B., Moene, K., & Willumsen, F. (2012). The tyranny of international index rankings. Journal of Development economics, 97(1), 1-14.
• IDI 2016. ICT Development Index. Retrieved from: http://www.itu.int/net4/ITU-D/idi/2016/.
• IPR 2013. Independent Panel Review of the Doing Business Report. Retrieved from: http://hendrikwolff.com/web/Doing%20business%20review%20panel%20report%20with%20signatures%20and%20Bibliography.pdf.
• Janger, J., Schubert, T., Andries, P., Rammer, C., & Hoskens, M. (2017). The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?. Research Policy, 46(1), 30-42.
• Van den Bergh, J. C. (2009). The GDP paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(2), 117-135.
• Jurigová, Z., Tučková, Z., & Kuncová, M. (2016). Economic sustainability as a future phenomenon: moving towards a sustainable hotel industry. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 6(1), 103-112. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2016.6.1(7)
• Karnitis, E., & Kucinskis, M. (2015). Increasing Quality of Life - the Goal and Indicator of the Development. Saarbrucken, Germany.
• Korauš, A., Simionescu, M., Bilan, Y., & Schönfeld, J. (2017a). The impact of monetary variables on the economic growth and sustainable development: case of selected countries. Journal of Security and Sustainability, 6(3), 383-390. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2017.6.3(5)
• Kordalska, A., & Olczyk, M. (2016). Global Competitiveness and Economic Growth: A One-Way or Two-Way Relationship?. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 11(1), 121-142.
• Lauzikas, M., Miliute, A., Tranavicius, L., & Kiciatovas, E. (2016). Service innovation commercialization factors in the fast food industry. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(2), 108-128. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.2(1)
• LRV 2016. Lithuania's Progress Strategy "Lithuania 2030". Retrieved from: https://lrv.lt/uploads/main/documents/files/EN_version/Useful_information/lithuania2030.pdf.
• Mahroum, S., & Al-Saleh, Y. (2013). Towards a functional framework for measuring national innovation efficacy. Technovation, 33(10), 320-332.
• Messaoud, B., & Teheni, Z. E. G. (2014). Business regulations and economic growth: What can be explained?. International Strategic Management Review, 2(2), 69-78.
• MKM 2016. Estonian Entrepreneurship Growth Strategy 2014-2020. Retrieved from: http://kasvustrateegia.mkm.ee/index_eng.html.
• Nasierowski, W., & Arcelus, F. J. (2012). About efficiency of innovations: What can be learned from the Innovation Union Scoreboard index. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 792-801.
• O'Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction; How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. Crown, New York.
• OECD (2005). The measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities; Oslo Manual, 3rd edition. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/2367580.pdf.
• Pauceanu, A. M. (2016). Innovation and entrepreneurship in Sultanate of Oman-an empirical study. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(1), 83-99. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.1(8)
• PKC (2016). National Development Plan for Latvia 2014-2020. Retrieved from: http://www.pkc.gov.lv/.
• PMR (2013). Indicators of Product Market Regulation. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/indicatorsofproductmarketregulationhomepage.htm.
• Rezk, M. R. A., Ibrahim, H. H., Tvaronaviciene, M., Sakr, M. M., & Piccinetti, L. (2015). Measuring of innovation activities in Egypt: the case of industry. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 3(1), 47-55. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2015.3.1(4)
• Schuller, B. J. (2014). Is GDP a suitable indicator of welfare? How to define and measure welfare. Applied Economics: Systematic Research, 8(2), 13-26.
• Stitilis, D., Pakutinskas, P., & Malinauskaite, I. (2016). Preconditions of sustainable ecosystem: cyber security policy and strategies. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(2), 174-182. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.2(5)
• Strielkowski, W. (2016). Entrepreneurship, sustainability, and solar distributed generation. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(1), 9-16. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.1(1)
• Strielkowski, W., Lisin, E., & Tvaronavičienė, M. (2016). Towards energy security: sustainable development of electrical energy storage. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 6(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2016.6.2(4)
• Stundžienė, A. (2015). Prediction of GDP Based on the Lag Economic Indicators. Engineering Economics, 26(2), 188-195.
• The Economist (2015). Pulling Rank; The Doing Business Report. The Economist, Sep 26th 2015.
• Tunčikienė, Ž., & Drejeris, R. (2015). Entrepreneurship ecosystem: methodological approaches to functions' review of public sector institutions. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 2(3), 118-132. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2014.2.3(1)
• Tvaronaviciene, M. (2016a). Entrepreneurship and energy consumption patterns: case of hoseholds in selected countries. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(1), 74-82. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.4.1(7)
• Tvaronaviciene, M. (2016b). Start-ups across the EU: if particular tendencies could be traced. Entrepreneurship and sustainability issues, 3(3), 290-298. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2016.3.3(6)
• WDR (2017). World Development Report. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2124.
• WGI (2016). The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrieved from: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/2071-8330.2017/10-1/15