Números Publicados

The paper seeks to know how the negative and positive results of sistemic change in Eastern Europe have been shared among different social levels. Who are the winners and the losers of this process and what opportunities have the most marginal groups to face up their problems. Thus, it analyses, first of all, the labor market contribution to increase inequality and the public sector capacity to correct these deviations.

The theoretical literature about the potentially positive spillovers arising from foreign direct investment underlines the existence of diverse channels through which local enterprises can benefit from the presence of foreign affiliates, contributing so to a higher economic growth.

The article outlines the main features of the French regulationist approach(especially as regards to its analysis of international economic relations) and of the Anglosaxon theories of International Political Economy (IPE), two strands of thought of particular usefulness as a result of their numerous theoretical and empirical contributions. The paper stresses the interest of the original regulationist approach and that of the heterodox branch of IPE.

The development of the ICT into the knowledge based economy has created important transformations, opening new possibilities for economic growth. Nevertheless, the ICT does not seem to make new economic growth into the less development countries. This phenomena has been defined as digital divide.

Since the end of the 1980’s, Central and Eastern European countries
(CEECs) have had the strategy of enhancing their integration into the worldwide
economy. In view of the difficulties facing insertion via the traditional
method of exports, this objective has taken place along with a policy of openness
towards foreign direct investment (FDI), since the various forms that
external capital can take, FDI seems to be that which has the greatest re-structuring

This article analyses the micro-macro paradox hypothesis. That is, if foreign aid is effective at macro level (macroeconomic indicators) and at micro level (the projects and programmes carried out by multilateral institutions, national agencies and non-governmental organizations. The result is that there is no paradox, since recent studies reveal the effectiveness of aid at both levels: micro and macro.