Advertisement

Impacts of the Crisis on the FDI-Led Development Model in Hungary: Emergence of Economic Patriotism or Shift from the Competition State to Patronage?

  • Miklós Szanyi
Chapter

Abstract

The 2008–2009 crisis generated much criticism concerning the efficacy of policies favouring global markets and multinational business. Economic patriotism became widespread, and Hungary has been active in implementing corresponding new policies. This chapter analyses these steps from a theoretical viewpoint and also shows the immediate (mostly negative) impacts on the economy and institutions. The application of selective advantage and disadvantage measures were aimed not only at the improvement of selected Hungarian firms’ competitive positions against multinational business, but also tried to split the concerted actions of the latter business segment. Some of the negatively affected firms sold their Hungarian branches, but most of them remained albeit they reduced activity. The selective disadvantage measures (taxes and levies on selected foreign firms, unfavourable changes in regulation) caused significant changes in market structure, but they also triggered EU competition procedures. Most harmful was the negative impact on market institutions, the decline of the rule of law in the country. The discussion is wrapped up with suggestions as to how the perceived problems with multinational business could be managed with market conforming policy tools.

References

  1. Antalóczy, K., Sass, M., & Szanyi, M. (2011). Policies for attracting foreign direct investment and enhancing its spillovers to endogenous firms: The case of Hungary. In E. Rugraff & M. W. Hansen (Eds.), Multinational corporations and Local Firms in Emerging Economies (pp. 181–210). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Boycko, M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1996). A theory of privatization. Economic Journal, 106, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clift, B., & Woll, C. (2012). Economic patriotism: Reinventing control over open markets. Journal of European Public Policy, 19, 307–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drahokoupil, J. (2008). Who won the contest for a new property class? Structural transformation of elites in the Visegrád Four region. Journal for East European Management Studies, 13, 360–377.Google Scholar
  5. Drahokoupil, J., Van Apeldorn, B., & Horn, L. (2008). Introduction: Towards a critical political economy of European governance. In J. Drahokoupil, B. Van Apeldorn, & L. Horn (Eds.), Contradictions and limits of neoliberal European Governance: From Lisbon to Lisbon (pp. 1–17). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Frydman, R., & Rapaczynski, A. (1994). Privatization in Eastern Europe: Is the state withering away? Budapest: Central European University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Helleiner, E., & Pickel, A. (Eds.). (2005). Economic nationalism in a globalizing world. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hungarian Government. (2009). J/8582. jelentés az ÁPV Zrt. és jogelődei – mint a privatizáció lebonyolítására létrehozott célszervezetek – tevékenységéről és a teljes privatizációs folyamatról (1990–2007) (Report No. 8582 about the activity of State Asset Holding Plc. and its predecessors – as special organizations to carry out privatization – and the complete privatization process, 1990–2007). Budapest.Google Scholar
  9. Iwasaki, I., & Tokunaga, M. (2014). Macroeconomic impacts of FDI in transition economies: A meta-analysis. World Development, 61, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kalotay, K., & Sass, M. (2012, October 18). Inward FDI in Hungary and its policy context. Columbia FDI Profiles. Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable International Investment.Google Scholar
  11. Laki, M. (2002). A nagyvállalkozók tulajdonszerzési esélyeiről a szocializmus után (About chances of obtaining property by entrepreneurs after socialism). Közgazdasági Szemle, 49, 45–58.Google Scholar
  12. Laki, M., Szalai, J. (2013). Tíz évvel később – a magyar nagyvállalkozók európai környezetben (Ten years after: Hungarian entrepreneurs in European environment). Budapest: Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány.Google Scholar
  13. Levy, J. (Ed.). (2006). The state after statism: New state activities in the age of liberalization. Oxford: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. McDermott, G. A. (2002). Embedded politics: Industrial networks and institutional change in post-communism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mihályi, P. (2015). A privatizált vagyon visszaállamosítása Magyarországon 2010–2014 (Re-nationalization of privatized property in Hungary 2010–2014) (Discussion Paper No. 2015/7). Budapest: Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  16. Naczyk, M. (2014). Budapest in Warsaw: Central European business elites and the rise of economic patriotism since the crisis. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2550496
  17. Nölke, A., & Vliegenhart, A. (2009). Enlarging the varieties of capitalism: The emergence of dependent market economies in East Central Europe. World Politics, 61, 670–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rapaczynski, A. (1996). The roles of state property and the market in establishing property rights. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schoenman, R. (2014). Networks and Institutions in Europe’s Emerging Markets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stark, D. (1996). Recombinant property in East European capitalism. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 492–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stark, D., & Bruszt, L. (1998). Postsocialist pathways: Transforming politics and property in East Central Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Stark, D., & Vedres, B. (2012). Political holes in the economy: The business network of partisan firms in Hungary. American Sociological Review, 77, 700–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Szanyi, M. (1996). Adaptive steps by Hungary’s industries during the transition crisis. Eastern European Economics, 34, 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Szanyi, M. (2002). Spillover effects and business linkages of foreign-owned firms in Hungary (Working Paper No. 126). Budapest: Institute of World Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. Szanyi, M. (2016). The reversal of the privatization logic in Central European transition economies. Acta Oeconomica, 66, 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Szentes, T. (Ed.). (2005–2006). Fejlődés, versenyképesség, globalizáció (Development, competitiveness, globalization). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
  27. Transparency International Hungary. (2014). Lifting the lid on lobbying: Strategic partnership agreements in an uncertain business and regulatory environment (National Report of Hungary). Budapest: Transparency International Hungary.Google Scholar
  28. Yakovlev, A. (2006). The evolution of business-state interaction in Russia: From state capture to business capture? Europe-Asia Studies, 58, 1033–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miklós Szanyi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of World EconomicsCentre for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of SciencesBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations