Systemic Change: The Delicate Mixture of Intentions and Spontaneity
In this paper I shall not present a more or less standard and descriptive summary ofthe current stage ofthe transformationprocess in my country and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe. I find it appropriate to defend the achieved results because, in spite of all existing problems, this historic transformation process has been—in principle—successful. Nevertheless, it is our task to understand more deeply the fascinating social mechanism that makes such a process possible and to describe the delicate interplay of the political, social and economic factors at work. My theoretical background and my practical experience tell me that systemic change—and that is what we have been undergoing while dismantling communism in our countries—is an evolutionary process and not an exercise in applied economics or political science. It is based on a very complicated mixture of planned and unplanned, of intended and unintended events, or, to put it differently, on a mixture of intentions and spontaneity. By participating in such a process we have opened another chapter in the never completed book devoted to the study of the relative role of human action and human design in the history of mankind, the book devoted to the study of “made orders” and “catalaxies”—to use well-known Hayekian terms. I hope we can add something to that study. We may confirm that successful transformation isnot the result of detailed reform blueprints in the hands ofomnipotent reform politicians. Rather, success depends on the unconstrained activity of human beings together with “modest
Market Order and Social Institutions: the Theory of F. Haiek and the Newly Emerging Market Economies
Subject of the analysis is the theory of F. A. Haiek about the institutional frame of the spontaneous market order and its contemporary sounding. Studied are the nature, functions and structure of the social functions and the way they generate order. At front is drawn the character of the institutions as information and communication carriers and their role for the economizing of a knowledge. The focus is set on the emerging of the informal rules and conventions, which appear as unintentional consequences from the human activity. The second part is dedicated to the relevance of the theory for the contemporary post-communist reality. Defended is the thesis that the paradigm for the spontaneous market order and its institutional frame is necessary as a philosophy of the new social arrangement in more continuous and global perspective. The messages of Haiek are revealed in its warnings for the danger for the monopoly power of the state in the creation of new norms of the social practice, as well as in the insisting for a policy, leaving sufficient space for the changes in the informal market institutions.
Analysis: The Agenda 2007 Proposals: Evolution or Revolution?
On 10 February 2004 the Commission published its proposal for the financial perspective 2007-2013. A week later it adopted the third report on economic and social cohesion. These two documents form the basis of the so-called ‘Agenda 2007 reforms’. They will be the greatest challenge for the enlarged EU after the intergovernmental conference, since they will determine the financial basis for EU policy-making until the middle of the next decade. The Agenda 2007 proposals certainly hint at courageous reforms, because they place a previously unheard-of emphasis on performance and quality. Under the proposals, structural operations should generate value for money, and the funds should focus on projects which generate added value at a European level. Overall the Commission’s proposals point in the right direction, because they balance, on the one hand, solidarity for the new Member States and weak regions in the old Member States with, on the other hand, investments in future tasks. Moreover, they constitute a paradigm shift. For the first time, the Common Agricultural Policy will not be the dominant expenditure category. Now it is up to the Member States to examine the proposals politically and find a compromise between sometimes very divergent interests. It is to be hoped that, during the debate over expenditure limits and division of funds, national interests do not outweigh European interests.