Location: Eastern Europe
Women at the Top of the Income Distribution: Are Transition Countries Different?
This policy brief reviews recent research on women at the top of the income distribution. The overall trend across a number of countries is that, while women are still a minority (and more so the closer to the top one moves), their share in top income groups has steadily increased since the 1970s. Detailed data from Sweden suggests that most of this rise is due to women increasingly earning high labor incomes (rather than capital becoming more important). It also shows that there are important differences between top income men and women, especially with respect to family circumstances. Comparing preliminary results from former Soviet and Eastern European countries indicates that there are, on average, more women at the top of the income distribution in these countries. On the other hand, the average time trend indicates that the share of women in top groups is falling. The preliminary results also indicate considerable heterogeneity across countries. These preliminary results require more detailed study, as does the question to which extent the relatively strong representation of women at the top of the income distribution reflects the “economic power” of women in the region.
The Gender Aspect of Rising Top Shares
Rising inequality has received a lot of attention in the policy debate as well as in the academic literature over the past decade. A particular feature of this discussion has been the increased concentration of both wealth and income in top groups. The summary of the World Inequality Report 2018 starts by stating that “The top 1% has captured twice as much of global income growth as the bottom 50% since 1980”. Such facts have, in turn, brought a lot of attention to the characteristics of top groups. What is driving their income growth? What is their income composition? Why have top shares increased so much in recent decades? (see, e.g., Roine and Waldenström, 2015, for an extensive overview, or Roine, 2016, for a brief summary).
However, one aspect which has received relatively little attention is that of gender. This may seem a little surprising. In a time when gender dimensions are often acknowledged as being important, one would expect that questions about the gender composition of top groups would also be of interest. If we know that top income shares are increasing, what is the gender composition of these groups? How has this changed over time?
This brief outlines some recent results on these questions and also points to some preliminary findings about a potential contrast between Western countries and (former) transition countries.
Evidence from Sweden, 1971-2017
Sweden is one of the few countries having had independent taxation of all taxpayers for a long period of time, allowing for a thorough analysis of the gender composition of top income groups. After having had joint taxation for married couples for most of the 20th century, and a short period of the option to be taxed independently even if married, Sweden switched to fully independent taxation in 1971. In a recent paper Boschini et al. (2020) study developments of men and women in top income groups in Sweden using detailed registry data on the full population for the almost 50-year period since.
The study finds a number of interesting results. First, it is evident that the share of women in top income groups has increased significantly, yet women remain clearly underrepresented, and more so the higher up in the distribution one moves. Figure 1 below shows the basic development over time for three top groups: the top 10 (P90-100), the top 1 (P99-100), and the top 0.1 group (P99.9-100) in the total income distribution and the labor income distribution respectively.
Figure 1. Share women in top groups in Sweden.

Source: Boschini et al. (2020)
Besides showing the general development comparing the two panels also reveals a subtler point: especially in the earlier decades and in the very top group (the top 0.1 group), there were substantially more women at the top of the total income distribution than at the top of the labor earnings distribution. In the 1970s and 1980s, the share of women in the top 0.1 group of the total income distribution is about two to three times as large as in the labor earnings distribution. Put differently, this means that in the past, to the extent that there were any women at the very top, they were mainly there thanks to capital incomes. Over time this changes and detailed analysis in the paper shows that the growth of the share of women in top groups is driven by an increasing share of high-income women in the labor income distribution.
While it seems that top income men and women have converged in terms of income composition and observable individual characteristics, the one area that still stands out as being markedly different is partner income. Figure 2 shows that top income women are much more likely to have partners who are also in the top of the income distribution. Even if the trend indicates convergence, large differences remain. Out of the top 1 women who are married, 70% have a partner who is at least in the top 10 (and about 30% are also in the top 1). For married top 1 men, only 30% have a partner who is in the top 10, and only a couple of percentage points are in the top 1. Part of this is, of course, a reflection of there being fewer women in top groups, but this is far from explaining all the difference (See Boschini et al., 2020 for more details).
Figure 2. Share of top income partners in Sweden.

Source: Boschini et al. (2020)
This is of course far from conclusive, but it points in the direction of family circumstances being a potential factor for explaining the relative absence of women in top income groups. Having a partner with a top (income) career is likely to be more demanding (for both parties) and such couples are much more common among top income women than men.
Several strands of research connect to this: for example, Fisman et al. (2006) find, among other things, that men are significantly “less likely to accept a woman who is more ambitious than he”. Also, work by Bertrand et al. (2015), on the impact of gender identity suggest that there is a social norm prescribing that men should earn more than women, which creates a discontinuity in the distribution of women’s contribution to total household income at 50 % (although Hederos Eriksson and Stenberg (2015) and Zinovyeva and Tverdostup (2018) find alternative explanations for this observation). Folke and Rickne (2020) find that women who are elected to high political office in Sweden face a higher probability of divorce (while this is not the case for men). Furthermore, according to the World Values Survey, close to 40% of Americans as well as Europeans agree with the statement “(i)f a woman earns more money than her husband, it’s almost certain to cause problems”. Taken together, findings like these suggest that, even in relatively progressive countries, social norms may contribute to women shying away from entering career paths leading to top incomes.
What About Other Countries?
Even though the Swedish data is unusually detailed, it is certainly not the only country where individual tax data exist. Atkinson et al. (2018) calculate the share of women in top groups for eight countries over time periods when individual tax data exist. Figure 3 puts their results next to those from Sweden. The resulting picture shows a remarkably similar development across countries and over time. The share of women in the top 10 has approximately tripled since the 1970s, from around 10% to around 30%. For the top 1 group, the level is slightly lower, but the relative increase is similarly large, from slightly above 5% to around 20%.
Figure 3. International comparison.

Source: Atkinson et al. (2018) and Boschini et al (2020).
Bobilev et al. (2019) explore the extent to which Luxemburg Income Study (LIS) data can be used to shed light on the presence of women at the top of the income distribution. Their findings point to a similar trend across a broader set of countries. Even though the main analysis has to be limited to the share of women at the top of the labor income distribution (since the possibilities to separate out individual capital incomes is limited), the picture in terms of the share of women in top groups is surprisingly similar across the 28 countries for which sufficient data exists from around 1980 until today. The overall finding is that the share of women in the top 10 group increases from about 10% around 1980 to just below 30% today.
To the extent that LIS data allows us to look at partners and family circumstances, the data shows a consistent pattern of asymmetries between top income men and women similar to that in Sweden found by Boschini et al. (2020). Having a partner and having children are positively associated with being in top income groups for men, but negatively associated for women (even though these differences have decreased over time). Also, top income men are likely to have partners who are not in the top of the income distribution, while this is not the case for top income women. Understanding patterns like these and the underlying channels is likely to contribute to our comprehension of the remaining differences in top income shares between men and women.
Are There Differences Between “East and West”?
A particularly interesting pattern in the LIS data is the difference that emerges when contrasting transition countries to Western countries.
As has often been pointed out, the Soviet Union and many of the countries in Eastern and Central Europe were, at least in some dimensions, forerunners in terms of promoting gender equality (e.g., Brainerd, 2000; Pollert, 2003; Campa and Serafinelli, 2019). This was mainly due to the high participation of women in the labor market as well as the (officially) universal access to basic health care and education.
However, some scholars have suggested that not all aspects of gender equality were as advanced in the countries in the Soviet Union and in Central and Eastern Europe (Einhorn, 1993; Wolchik and Meyer, 1985). Even though women were highly integrated in the labor market, they were still expected to take care of child rearing and housework at the same time (UNICEF, 1999). The gender pay gap and gender segregation in the labor market was also similar to levels found in OECD countries. In addition, despite the high number of women in representative positions in communist party politics, women were rarely found in positions of real power in the political sphere (Pollert, 2003).
Looking just at average values (in the labor income distributions), there are clear differences between East and West in top groups. The share of women among the top earning groups was considerably higher in some former Soviet countries during and after transition. However, the shares of women in top income groups have been converging in East and West.
Figure 4. Share of women in the top 10 / top 1 income groups, East vs. West.

Data source: Own calculations based on LIS data. West: unweighted average for Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Norway, New Zealand, Spain, Great Britain. East: unweighted average for the Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia and the Slovak Republic.
An analysis of the situation at the country level, provides a more complex picture. Figure 5 clearly indicates that the total representation of women in the top 10 income group has been higher in Eastern European countries than in the West (the pattern is similar for the top 1). However, while the share of women in top income groups has consistently increased in Western countries, the developments for women are much less homogenous in Eastern Europe (being below the diagonal indicates a higher share of women in the top 10 in 2005-2020 as compared to 1990-2005).
In Estonia, Slovakia and Poland, women are less likely to be part of the top income group in the period from 2005 to 2020 than they were in the years directly following transition. Considering that the most recent family policies in Poland have been shown to discourage female labor supply (Myck, Trzciński, 2019), this is maybe not so surprising.
Figure 5: Share of women in top 10 income group by country.

Data source: Own calculations based on LIS data. Eastern and Western countries defined as if Figure 4.
The share of women in the top 10 income group in Estonia declined from an astonishingly high 53% in 2000 to about 31% in 2013, which, admittedly, is still high compared to the corresponding average rate for Western countries (28%). Women in Russia, Hungary, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, by contrast, are more likely to be among the top earners in the period from 2005 to 2020 than they were between 1990 and 2005. Moreover, among all the countries in our sample, more recently, Slovenia is the country with the highest share of women in the top 10 of income earners (44% in 2007); Slovenian women seem to have gained grounds even after transition.
How come the representation of women in top income groups remains high (or even increases) in some transition countries but decreases in others? What is the role played by policy and regulation and what role can be attributed to social norms, family circumstances and institutions such as childcare? May economic growth have led to women dropping out of the labor force or never entering it to do care work, even when they had been or potentially could have been part of top income groups? What would be the impact of adding capital incomes to the picture?
Conclusion
Looking across a large number of countries, women seem to have increased their presence in top income groups since the 1970s. This has mostly been driven by women increasingly having high paying jobs. A preliminary look at LIS data indicates that former Soviet and Eastern European countries on average had higher shares of women in top groups around 1990, probably reflecting high labor market participation as well as relatively high education levels for women. But it also indicates that in some Eastern European countries, the share of women in top groups has dropped since the 1990s. As noted by Campa, Demirel, and Roine (2018) there seems to be an overall convergence in some dimensions of gender equality in transition countries, but there is also considerable variation across countries. More detailed studies of how men and women fare in terms of reaching top positions in incomes – but also in other areas like politics – are much needed and likely to be an interesting research area for years to come.
References
- Atkinson, Anthony B., Alessandra Casarico and Sarah Voitchovsky (2018). “Top incomes and the gender divide”, The Journal of Economic Inequality. 16 (2), 225–256.
- Azmat, Ghazala and Barbara Petrongolo, (2014). “Gender and the labour market: what have we learned from field and lab experiments?” Labour Economics. 30, 32–40.
- Blau, Francine D., Lawrence M. Kahn (2017). “The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations”, Journal of Economic Literature 55(3), 789-865.
- Bertrand, Marianne, Jessica Pan and Emir Kamenic (2015). “Gender identity and relative income within households”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130 (2), 571–614.
- Bertrand, Marianne, (2018). “Coase Lecture – The Glass Ceiling”. Economica 85: 205–231.
- Bobilev, Roman, Anne Boschini, Jesper Roine (2019). Women in the Top of the Income Distribution –What Can we Learn from LIS-Data?, Forthcoming Italian Economic Journal.
- Boschini, Anne, Kristin Gunnarsson, Jesper Roine (2020). “Women in top incomes – Evidence from Sweden 1971–2017”. Journal of Public Economics, 181, January 2020.
- Brainerd, Elizabeth (2000). “Women in Transition: Changes in Gender Wage Differentials in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union”, ILR Review, 54(1): 138-162.
- Campa, Pamela, Merve Demirel, Jesper Roine (2018). “How Should Policy-Makers Use Gender Equality Indexes?”. FREE Policy Paper, November 2018.
- Campa, Pamela and Michel Serafinell (2019). “Politico-Economic Regimes and Attitudes: Female Workers under State-Socialism.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 101 (2). 233 – 248.
- Einhorn, Barbara (1993). “Cinderella Goes to Market: Citizenship, Gender and Women’s Movements in East Central Europe”. London/ New York: Verso.
- Eriksson, Karin Hederos and Anders Stenberg (2015). “Gender Identity and Relative Income within Households: Evidence from Sweden”, IZA Discussion paper No. 9533.
- Fisman, Raymond, Sheena S. Iyengar, Emir Kamenica and Itamar Simonson (2006). “Gender Differences in Mate Selection: Evidence From a Speed Dating Experiment”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121 (2), 673–697.
- Folke, Olle and Johanna Rickne (2020). “All the Single Ladies: Job Promotions and the Durability of Marriage”. forthcoming American Economic Journal: Applied Economics.
- Fortin, Nicole, Brian Bell, Michael Böhm (2017). “Top earnings inequality and the gender pay gap: Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.” Labour Economics, 47, 107–123.
- ILO (N.D.). “Gender Equality”. Accessed February 2020.
- Myck, Michal and Kajetan Trzciński (2019). “From Partial to Full Universality: The Family 500+ Programme in Poland and Its Labour Supply Implications”, FREE Policy Brief, December 16, 2019.
- Pollert, Anne (2003). “Women, work and equal opportunities in post-Communist transition”, Work, Employment and Society, 17(2): 331-357.
- Roine, Jesper, and Daniel Waldenström (2015). “Long-Run Trends in the Distribution of Income and Wealth”, chapter in Atkinson, A.B., Bourguignon, F. (Eds.), Handbook of Income Distribution, vol. 2A, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
- Roine, Jesper (2016),“Global Inequality – What Do We Mean and What Do We Know?”, FREE Policy Brief, April 24, 2016.
- UNICEF (1999). “Women in Transition”, Regional monitoring Report 6. UNICEF ICDC.
- Wolchik, Sharon L. and Alfred G. Meyer, eds. (1985). “Women, State, and Party in Eastern Europe”. Durham, NC.
- Zinovyeva, Natalia and Marina Tverdostup (2018). “Gender Identity, Co-Working Spouses and Relative Income within Households”. IZA Discussion Paper No. 11757.
Removing Obstacles to Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment – What Can Policy Makers Learn from Global Research on Gender Economics?
On November 15-16, 2019, the FREE Network and the ISET Policy Institute organized and conducted an international gender economics conference in Tbilisi, Georgia. The conference was organized as part of the FROGEE initiative – the Forum for Research on Gender Economics – supported by the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) and coordinated by the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE). The conference brought together researchers, policymakers, and the broader development community to discuss obstacles to gender equality and women’s economic empowerment, as well as policies to remove existing constraints, with a particular focus on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies. This policy brief provides an overview of the main takeaways from the presentations, with a special focus on policy-relevant lessons.
Introduction
In November 2019, Tbilisi welcomed its first international academic conference on gender economics, “Removing Obstacles to Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment”. The conference focused on the state of economic policy and gender issues around the world and more specifically in the ECA (Europe and Central Asia) region. The opening remarks were offered by two prominent keynote speakers – Dr. Caren Grown, Senior Director for Gender at the World Bank Group, Washington D.C, and Dr. Shahra Razavi, Chief of Research and Data at UN Women HQ in New York. The key addresses offered a global perspective on the current state of gender equality and progress made during the last 20 years. The global overview was followed by a policy panel discussion featuring prominent members of the policy-making community in Georgia. The panel participants reflected on how various policies have impacted gender (in)equality in the South Caucasus and in Georgia in particular. Later in the day, plenary presentations offered a preview of the South Caucasus Gender Equality Index, which is being developed by the ISET Policy Institute, and new research in gender economics done by academics in Georgia, Armenia, Belarus and Sweden.
The second day of the conference showcased research conducted by academics from over 15 countries covering 4 continents. It presented a range of diverse topics in gender economics, including, most prominently the links between childcare policies and labor supply decisions of women, female labor force participation (LFP) and happiness, evolving family structure and gender-selection preferences, the impact of economic, financial and public policies on women’s empowerment, the male-female earnings gap and gender aspects of international trade.
Below, we summarize the results and policy lessons that emerge from the body of work presented at the conference.
Gender Equality Progress in the ECA Region and Worldwide: Key Takeaways
First, as recent global data shows, the progress in women’s access to resources, in particular their access to the labor market, has on average stalled worldwide in the last 20 years. The labor market participation rate of women in 2018 stood at 63% globally, which is largely the same as in 1998, with some notable progress observed only in Latin America and the Caribbean (increase from 57% to 67% between 1998 and 2018), Australia and New Zealand (70 to 79%), as well as Northern Africa and West Asia (29 to 33%). The labor force participation gap between men and women is most pronounced for women who are married or in unions (44% gap, as opposed to 20% for single/never married or 17.9% for divorced/separated women).
Second, the ratio of time spent on unpaid care work by females was about 3-4 times that of males in most countries in the world, with some notable outliers: 11 times in Pakistan, 10 times in Cambodia and 9 times in Egypt. Only in Australia and New Zealand, the ratio of female to male time spent on unpaid work was slightly below 2. Thus, around the world, family responsibilities and unpaid work at home have clearly disproportionately burdened women, potentially preventing them from having an independent source of labor income, and generally weakening their financial position and bargaining power within the family unit. The recent UN Women report on Families in the Changing World (2019) argues for implementing a comprehensive package of family and women-friendly policy measures, which would include, among others, universal childhood education and care, universal healthcare coverage, long-term care for the elderly, etc. Such a comprehensive package would cost between 2-4% of GDP for most countries covered by the study. At the same time, the report argues that it would generate jobs, new investments and be a sizeable source of new tax revenue to the economies. Hence, the costs of such a program would be partially offset by the economic and tax benefits of formalizing the informal care economy. The study also details the ways in which countries could mobilize resources to pay for such packages, including improving tax collection, eliminating illicit financial flows, and leveraging aid and transfers.
For the South Caucasus in particular, the state of gender equality has not systematically been tracked until now. While there exists a number of thematic studies, surveys and narratives, as well as a more general Gender Inequality Index (GII) compiled by UNDP for all countries, a deeper systematic approach has recently been pioneered by the ISET Policy Institute, which started the ambitious project of developing a Gender Equality Index for the South Caucasus and, going forward, for the broader region of transition economies. The methodology behind the index is similar to the one adopted by the European Institute for Gender Equality, which tracks the Gender Equality Index for 28 European countries across a number of dimensions. Obviously, issues of data availability make it more challenging to build such an index in the context of transition economies. Thus, ISET-PI is working to construct some of the measures for the transition economies, using country-level data and household-level databases.
Childcare Policies and Labor Supply
One of the key messages emerging from the academic research in the area of childcare policies and labor supply was that gender-focused social policies need to be crafted carefully, with a focus on the binding constraints of the specific country context. A paper by Vardan Baghdasaryan and Gayane Barseghyan looked at how child-care service availability (affordability) affected the female labor force participation on the intensive and extensive margins in Armenia. The stage for a natural experiment in economic policy was set at the time when the Municipality of Yerevan unexpectedly decided to abolish childcare services fees (roughly 15% of average wage). The researchers hypothesized that such an intervention would have resulted in increased female LFP, as was the case in other (mostly developed) regions and countries around the world (e.g. Quebec in Canada). In the context of Armenia, however, the authors observe that there was no significant effect on female LFP rate on the extensive margin, meaning there was no evidence of inactive women entering the labor force. One possible explanation is that in the context of a developing country such as Armenia, the limiting factor to female participation in the labor force is the lack of market demand for the skills profile of non-active mothers. In such an environment, as the authors conclude, the monetary incentives do not suffice to lift the binding constraint on female LFP.
Yolanda Pena-Boquete presented a study on the case of Australia which analyzed how the labor hours and LFP of both women and men in the family are affected when either the mother’s or the father’s wages increase or when the price of childcare changes. The study finds that the mothers’ working hours respond positively and much stronger to a change in hourly wage than the fathers’. The policy implication is that an increase in mothers’ hourly wage would potentially result in a significant increase in their working hours and labor force participation. The wage effect on women’s working hours and LFP is much more pronounced even compared to the scenario when childcare prices decline.
Overall, the studies in this area demonstrated the need for a careful, multi-faceted approach in designing effective and cost-efficient labor market policies aimed at increasing labor force participation by married women with children.
Labor Force Participation and Happiness: Evidence from the South Caucasus
The paper by Norberto Pignatti and Karine Torosyan looked at the differences in the reported happiness levels between women of different labor market status in the three South Caucasus countries. The intriguing finding of the study is that while in Georgia, there is no difference in the reported happiness level between working women and housewives, in Armenia and Azerbaijan, working women with similar characteristics are much less likely to report being “very happy” than housewives. The interesting finding is that the overall results for Georgia also apply to the Armenian and Azerbaijani minority women in the country, implying that “cultural factors” may play a minor role in the reported differences between countries.
Family Structure and Gender-Selection Preferences
Gender-biased sex selection (GBSS) has been on the forefront of gender policy issues in the South Caucasus, as Armenia, Azerbaijan and, until recently, Georgia struggled with skewed sex ratios at birth (SRB). Understanding the driving forces behind GBSS, and in particular son-preference as a socio-economic phenomenon, is especially important. One of the recent studies on the issue was presented by Davit Keshelava of the ISET Policy Institute. The study “Social Economic Policy Analysis with Regard to Son Preference and Gender-biased Sex Selection” looked at the factors underlying GBSS rise and fall in Georgia over the last 15 years. The study also gleaned facts about the changing attitudes towards GBSS and son-preferences in different regions of Georgia. One of the study’s main findings is that the fall in the sex ratio at birth has been statistically significantly correlated with real income growth in the regions, reduction in poverty, and female employment. Among other factors significantly affecting the reduction in sex ratio at birth, was, surprisingly, the level of male education, while female education was statistically insignificant. The study documented a persisting son preference in Georgia, but also high awareness and strong negative attitudes towards gender biased sex selection in those regions that showed the sharpest improvement in sex ratio at birth over time.
Looking at the issue of gender preferences in the context of transition economies in Europe, Izabela Wowczko presented joint work with Michał Myck and Monika Oczkowska which investigated how preferences for the gender composition of children in the family might have changed in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries after the fall of communism. The results showed that gender-neutrality was observed in almost all CEE countries before the transition. After the transition of the 1990s, many of the same forces which operated in the South Caucasus have affected the countries of Central and Eastern Europe – namely, decline in incomes, decimated traditional social safety nets and better access to ultrasound and family planning technologies. However, in the post-transition CEE countries, the authors observe a clear preference for a mix (boy/girl) or possibly boys at parity three (i.e. having two boys or a boy and a girl in the family reduced the likelihood of having a third child significantly, as opposed to having two girls). It was also observed that in most CEE countries (except Romania), there was an increased likelihood of having a second child if the first child is a boy – thus demonstrating a girl preference at parity two.
Policy Impact on Women’s Empowerment
A study from India by Mridula Goel and Nidhi Ravishankar looked at the impact of policy interventions on the long-term indicators of women empowerment. It shows that public policies were responsible for improving the so-called “power enablers”, such as literacy rates, financial access, property rights, political voice, etc. However, there is some evidence that not all traditional power enablers, e.g. having a bank account or working for money, are correlated with higher indicators of empowerment, measured by a woman’s autonomy in decision-making within the family. For example, working for money (receiving cash compensation) or having a bank account was found to be negatively correlated with a woman’s ability to decide how her own money is spent – possibly pointing to the existence of prejudice or negative attitudes within the household in such cases.
Another interesting study on this topic by Maria Perrotta Berlin, Evelina Bonnier and Anders Olofsgård looked at whether foreign aid projects foster female empowerment in the surrounding community using data from Malawi. It finds support for a small positive impact of aid on men’s and women’s attitudes related to domestic violence and sexual rights. There is, however, little systematic difference in the impact of gender-targeted aid versus general aid – with exceptions being the impacts on women’s experience of violence and women’s participation in decision-making.
Male-Female Earnings Gap and Gender Aspects of International Trade
The male-female earnings gap is a recurring topic in gender economics. Whether the gap is driven by differences in education and skills of men and women, labor market discrimination, choices of working hours, the “glass ceiling” or “sticky floor” phenomena, the gap is evident and persistent in both developed and developing countries. One of the papers presented by Dagmara Nikulin looked at the impact of trade liberalization on the gender wage gap in Europe. Generally, the economic literature does not provide conclusive evidence in this regard, and the link remains ambiguous. The paper, examining evidence from Europe, finds in particular that participation in global value chains (GVC), which the authors measure by foreign value added in exports, is correlated with reduced wages overall, but the negative effect on wage is lower for men than for women.
Echoing the results of the previous study, the paper by Marie-France Paquet and Georgina Wainwright-Kemdirim, “Since the effects of trade liberalization are not gender neutral, how can we improve its gender outcome? – Crafting Canada’s Gender Responsive Trade Policy” focuses on the problem of identifying and addressing potentially negative impacts of trade on female jobs. The study details a diagnostic modelling approach, which is to use CGE modeling combined with sectoral employment data (a labour module within CGE). The proposed model uses an overlapping generation framework and includes an occupational matrix to allow movements between occupations. This approach allows for specific potential impacts of generic FTAs by gender, age group and occupation.
Conclusion
To sum up, the first international academic conference on gender economics issues in Tbilisi highlighted the diversity and complexity of gender issues around the world and in the South Caucasus region in particular. It also became a powerful catalyst for new research and collaboration ideas among participating institutions and individual researchers. Finally, it demonstrated how policy-oriented research can help inform the policy-making community about the areas where intervention is most needed, design the most effective policies, and calculate the associated costs and benefits of interventions.
References to Selected Presentations
- Shahra Razavi “Policies for Gender Equality in an Unequal World: Challenges and Opportunities”, keynote presentation.
- Vardan Baghdasaryan and Gayane Barseghyan “Child Care Policy, Maternal Labor Supply and Household Welfare: Evidence From a Natural Experiment”.
- Michal Myck and Kajetan Trzcinski “From Partial to Full Universality: the Family 500+ Programme in Poland and its Labour Supply Implications”.
- Karen Mumford, Antonia Parera-Nicolau, Yolanda Pena-Boquete “Labour Supply and Childcare: Allowing Both Parents to Choose”.
- Norberto Pignatti, Karine Torosyan “Employment vs. Homestay and Happiness of Women in the South Caucasus”.
- Davit Keshelava et al. ISET Policy Institute Report “Social Economic Policy Analysis with Regard to Son Preference and Gender-biased Sex Selection”.
- Izabela Wowczko, Michał Myck and Monika Oczkowska “Gender Preferences in Central and Eastern Europe as Reflected in Family Structure”.
- Mridula Goel, Nidhi Ravishankar “Has Public Policy Succeeded in Enhancing Women Autonomy and Empowerment in India Over the Last Decade?”.
- Maria Perrotta Berlin, Evelina Bonnier and Anders Olofsgård “The Donor Footprint and Female Empowerment”.
- Dagmara Nikulin & Joanna Wolszczak-Derlacz “Gender Wage Gap and the International Trade Involvement. Evidence for European workers”.
- Marie-France Paquet, Georgina Wainwright-Kemdirim, “Since the Effects of Trade Liberalization are not Gender Neutral, How can we Improve its Gender Outcome? – Crafting Canada’s Gender Responsive Trade Policy”.
Does Gender Diversity Actually Matter?
Measuring the effects of gender diversity on performance is important to understand the impact of gender quotas. However, the effects of gender diversity remain understudied. We need data with a reliable assessment of team member quality to disentangle the effects of diversity from compositional effects (when higher-quality women replace mediocre men). We use the unique database of the trivia game “What? Where? When?” which has information on both the performance and gender composition of the team and allows to track each player individually. We find that the gender diversity of the team has no statistically significant effect once we control for the quality of each player. In this particular environment, with little evidence of gender discrimination, instruments like gender quotas have no merit. This result does not apply to discriminatory environments where gender quotas could bring benefits through compositional effects.
Introduction
As gender quotas have been widely introduced in politics and in the corporate world, the effects of gender diversity have become the center of attention of many economists. Many observational studies find positive effects of gender diversity on corporate boards’ performance (Desvaux, Devillard, & Sancier-Sultan, 2010). Other studies, using the introduction of gender quotas in boards as a natural experiment, find negative effects on stock valuation, which disappear in the longer run (Ahern and Dittmar, 2012; Matsa and Miller, 2013; Eckbo et al., 2019).
The effect of gender diversity on team performance may run through two different mechanisms. One mechanism is compositional effects due to discrimination: if women face a glass ceiling, only the best women get into teams/boards, and they are on average of higher quality than men. Hence, boards with female representatives perform better. The discrimination mechanism has been shown to be at work in the political setting, for example: gender quotas in parties lead to higher-quality women replacing mediocre men (Besley et al., 2017). The other mechanism is the true effect of gender diversity through complementarity between men and women: if they differ substantially in some dimensions, these differences might become the source of better team decisions, or, on the contrary, inefficiencies in decision-making.
To separate between the two mechanisms – compositional effects and diversity effects – we need data with reliable quality measurement for each team member. Controlling for team member quality would take care of the compositional effect, and the gender composition would be significant only if there is a true gender diversity effect.
We use the What? Where? When? trivia game dataset to measure the effects of gender diversity on team performance with and without control for a player’s quality.
The What? Where? When? Game
What? Where? When? (WWW) is a team-played trivia game popular in post-Soviet countries. Teams of six players are asked questions and have one minute to come up with an answer. Typically, in order to find the correct answer, a team needs to combine both logical thinking and knowledge. A tournament usually consists of 36-90 questions. The team with the most correct answers wins the first place. In 2003, a unified database of the game was created. This database contains records of more than 218,000 individuals who have played in at least one of the 6,000 recorded tournaments.
The What? Where? When? Dataset
A unit of observation in our dataset is one game played by a team. It contains the unique ID of the team, the ID of each player, information about the number of games played by the team and by each player, the tournament date, the difficulty of the tournament and the number of teams. We identify the gender of the players through their names and patronymic names. Overall, we use 74,475 team-game observations which were played by 2,854 teams (23,000 single players) from 2013 to 2018.
Performance Measure
The measure of a team’s performance in a tournament is the percentage of correct answers normalized by the average percentage of correct answers in this tournament. We use player’s individual fixed effects as a measure of their quality in our regression analysis.
Gender Aspects in What? Where? When?
Only 31.5% of the players in the sample are female, however, other than that, we fail to find any significant evidence indicating gender discrimination or segregation. Table 1 presents the actual shares of team-game observations by gender composition as well as the predicted shares if assignment to teams was random. The difference between the actual shares and predicted shares does not appear to be economically significant.
Table 1: The actual distribution of women across teams is not different from random

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the What? Where? When? dataset. Random assignment assumes that the share of women across all teams is equal to 31.5% as in the actual data.
Results
The basic model of our analysis, Model 1 examines the association between the performance of a team, normalized by tournament difficulty, with dummy variables for gender diversity (defined as the number of minority gender players in the team, i.e. diversity_1 is true if there is only one woman or only one man on the team). We also include the individual fixed effects of each player in the second specification (Model 2), to control for the quality of players and rule out possible composition effects.
Table 2. Effect of diversity on performance with and without the individual quality controls

Source: Authors’ calculations based on What? Where? When? dataset. Individual fixed effects are included in the specification with the quality control. Only players who played at least a median number of games (62) are included.
The coefficients of Model 1 and 2 are shown in Table 2. While diversity is significant in the first specification, after accounting for the individual quality of players, we cannot reject the hypothesis of insignificance of gender diversity. These results hold under different specifications: with controls for player experience, with different player experience cutoffs, or including the neural network-generated predictions of performance.
Figure 1. The distribution of individual coefficients (proxy for player quality) for female and male players

Source: Authors’ calculations based on the What? Where? When? dataset. Each individual coefficient is a proxy to the player’s quality estimated in the regression from Table 2. Only players who played at least a median number of games (62) are included.
Figure 1 presents the distributions of individual coefficients of female and male players. In our sample, the female distribution centers slightly to the left of the male one. It explains the negative diversity coefficients in the specification without the individual fixed effects – in this case, the diversity dummies capture the lower average quality of female players.
Conclusion
Our study aimed at disentangling compositional and pure effects of gender diversity by using a novel dataset of a team played trivia game. Our main finding is that after accounting for the individual quality of team members, the gender composition of a team does not appear to be significant for a team’s performance.
Although it is always dangerous to extrapolate findings obtained in specific settings, we believe that the positive gender diversity effects found in other studies are often manifestations of the change in the average quality of team/board members i.e. compositional effects rather than gender diversity effects per se. From a policy point of view, this means that while we need gender quotas in areas suffering from gender discrimination, once we reach equal opportunities such instruments may no longer have any positive effects.
References
- Ahern, Kenneth R., and Amy K. Dittmar, 2012. “The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 127.1: 137-197.
- Besley, Timothy, Olle Folke, Torsten Persson, and Johanna Rickne, 2017. “Gender quotas and the crisis of the mediocre man: Theory and evidence from Sweden.” American Economic Review 107, no. 8 : 2204-42.
- Desvaux, Georges, Sandrine Devillard, and Sandra Sancier-Sultan, 2010. “Women at the top of corporations: Making it happen.” McKinsey & company : 7-8.
- Eckbo, B. Espen, Knut Nygaard, and Karin S. Thorburn, 2019. “Board Gender-Balancing and Firm Value.” Dartmouth College working paper.
- Matsa, David A., and Amalia R. Miller, 2013. “A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 5.3: 136-69.
The Political Economics of Long Run Development in Eastern Europe: Insights from the 2019 SITE Academic Conference
Thirty years after the fall of communism, many assume that the economic transition of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet States towards a system of market economy is complete. But the region faces new challenges, of both economic and political kind, which renders a thorough understanding the past even more important. This policy brief is based on the scientific contributions presented at the 7th SITE Academic Conference held at the Stockholm School of Economics from December 16th to December 17th, 2019. Organized by the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE), the conference brought together academics from all over Europe and the United States to share and discuss their research on economic and political development in Eastern Europe.
The Imperial and Soviet Periods
In the first section of the conference, papers with a focus on the long-term history of Eastern Europe and its implications for more recent events were presented. Marvin Suesse presented his research on how the Russian State Bank financed Tsarist Russia´s belated industrialization, a question that had been discussed by historians, but never thoroughly analyzed quantitatively. By geo-coding historical manufacturing censuses around the turn of the century and using distance between bank branches and factory location, the causal impact of the expansion of the State Bank is estimated, revealing large effects on firm revenues and productivity. These effects are largest in areas where alternative means of financing were least available and where human capital was more abundant.
Natalya Naumenko presented her findings on the economic consequences of the 1933 Soviet famine, which in terms of casualties was extremely devastating. She uses the meteorological conditions a year earlier as an instrumental variable and finds that the famine, which was mostly a rural phenomenon, had a persistent negative effect on the urban population while the rural population recovered relatively quickly.
Gerhard Toews discussed the long-term consequences on regional development of the displacement of an estimated 3 million “enemies of the people”, political prisoners typically belonging to the elite of the society, into the gulags in the early years of the Soviet Union. Using archival data, he has constructed a large database describing the gulag population in terms of the shares of “enemies” relative to other prisoners and taking into account their socio-economic characteristics i.e. the much higher levels of education of the former group. Exploiting variation within gulags, the results suggest that a historically higher density of “enemies” means higher economic prosperity today as measured by nightlight intensity.
Taking another angle, Christian Ochsner investigated the effects of the Red Army´s occupation on post-war Europe, using the demarcation line crossing the Austrian state of Styria as a natural experiment. His conclusion is that even the temporary occupation affected the region’s long-term development, the main channel being age-specific migration.
Finally, Andreas Stegman offered an analysis of the effects of the 1972 East German Extended Visitors Program. The program reduced travel restrictions for West German visitors traveling to certain districts of East Germany. Using a geographic regression discontinuity design comparing similar districts with and without the program, he shows that included districts indeed received much more visits from West Germany and that their citizens were more likely to protest against the Communist government and less likely to vote for the ruling party. This suggests that face-to-face interaction can influence beliefs and attitudes in non-democratic regimes, in turn influencing individual behavior and societal outcomes during transition.
Corruption, Conflict and Public Institutions
Another topic of the conference was the current role of corruption, conflict, electoral fraud and public sector effectiveness for the region. Scott Gehlbach presented his most recent research on the ownership patterns and strategies of Ukrainian oligarchs before and after the Orange revolution. By mapping oligarchs to changing political leadership, he shows how firm owners in Ukraine take actions to protect their property depending on their connections with the current government. He finds that obfuscation of ownership behind holding companies and complicated structures is a potentially valuable strategy in this environment in general but becomes particularly important when an oligarch loses direct connections to the ruling regime.
Likewise, Timothy Frye analyzed election subversion by employers in Russia, Argentina, Venezuela, Turkey and Nigeria. He finds that in Russia, public sector employers and especially state-owned firms are more likely to influence their employees’ decision to vote than private companies. Furthermore, work place mobilization by employers in Russia is clearly negatively associated with the freedom of the press. Election subversion is more likely to be successful when the degree of dependence of the employee is high and the employer’s potential threats are credible. Among Russian firm officials, the most frequently named motivations for them to practice election subversion are the desire to improve their relationship with the authority and the intention to help their party.
Michal Myck studied the impact of the transition experience on economic development around the Polish-German border. Polish communities close to the border were economically backward at the beginning of the transition but could potentially benefit from trade opportunities with an opening towards the West. Using similar methods to those of Stegman above, and nightlight intensity as a measure of economic activity as for instance Toews, Myck finds significant evidence for economic convergence both between Germany and Poland, and between Polish border regions and the rest of Poland.
Vasily Korovkin presented his research on the impact of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine on trade in non-conflict areas in Ukraine, hypothesizing that the conflict may cause a trade diversion away from Russia, particularly so in areas with many ethnic Ukrainians. Using variation in the share of the Russian speaking population at the county level as well as detailed firm level export and import data, he finds that the decrease in trade with Russia is negatively correlated with the share of the Russian speaking population. Potential mechanisms include a decline in trust at the firm level and changes in local attitudes including consumer boycotts.
Finally, Tetyana Tyshchuk analyzed the effects of a Ukrainian public sector reform on civil servants’ capacity and autonomy. The reform created public policy directorates parallel to the regular bureaucracy in 10 ministries. Members of the directorates were hired based on a different procedure and different merits relative to regular public servants and received significantly higher salaries. Tyshchuk finds that the better paid civil servants indeed score higher on many, though not all, indicators of capacity and autonomy.
Information, Populism and Authoritarianism Today
The final important theme of the conference was the role of information and media, old and new, in today’s politics. In the event´s first keynote speech, Ruben Enikolopov analyzed the political effects of the Internet and social media whose low entry barriers and reliance on user-generated content make them decisively different from traditional media channels. On the one hand, this represents a chance for opposition leaders and whistleblowers to make their voice heard and may improve government accountability. On the other, these media may also become a platform for extremists. Enikolopov presented some of his work analyzing to what extent social media has contributed to fighting corruption in Russia. Using the timings of blog posts by the famous Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny on corporate governance violations in state-owned companies, he shows that revelations resulted in an immediate drop in the price of the traded shares of the respective companies. He also finds evidence suggesting that Navalny´s blog posts resulted in management changes in these companies. In related papers, he exploits the spread of VKontakte (VK), the Russian version of Facebook, to better understand the influence of social networks on political activism, voting and the occurrence of hate crime. He finds that the spread of VK is indeed causally related to political protests, though not because it nurtures opposition to the government, but rather because it facilitates protest co-ordination. With respect to hate crime, he finds that social media only has an effect in areas where it falls on fertile grounds and where there already are high levels of nationalism. The tentative conclusion is that in Russia – as in Western countries – social media seems to have increased political polarization.
On a similar topic but taking a more theoretical approach, Galina Zudenkova investigated the link between information and communication technologies (ICT), regime contestation and censorship. In a game theoretical framework, where citizens use ICT both to learn about the competency of the government and to coordinate protests, governments can use different tools to censor information to increase their chances of survival. Zudenkova finds that less competent regimes are more likely to censor coordination, whereas intermediate regimes are more likely to focus on censoring content. These theoretical predictions are then tested using country level data.
The targeted use of information has also played a key role in Putin’s Russia according to Daniel Treisman. In his keynote speech, he argued that while the 20th century dictatorships were mainly based on violence and ideology, the 21st century has been characterized by a sizeable shift towards what he calls “informational autocracy”. Constructing a dataset on the methods used by authoritarian regimes to maintain power between 1946 and 2015, he shows that the use of torture and violence peaked among those dictators who took power in the 1980s and has declined since. Furthermore, he highlights a remarkable shift from topics of violence towards topics of economic competency in dictators’ speeches. However, Treisman finds that by instrumentalizing information, dictators fool the public “but not the elite”. In democratic regimes, those with tertiary education tend to rate their political leaders higher than people without tertiary education. In the new informational authoritarian regime, the opposite seems to be the case. According to Treisman, this is because the “informed elite” has a better understanding of the political reality in places where the media is censored, Putin’s Russia being a good example. Treisman concluded that this new model of authoritarianism has become the prevalent model outside of Europe and today also has its advocates inside the European Union.
The conference ended with a final keynote speech by Sergei Guriev on the political economy of populism. Using existing definitions, he first confirmed that Europe has seen a rise in right-wing populism in the last 20 years. Secular trends, such as globalization and new communication technology, but also the recent global financial crisis, are driving factors behind the rise of populist parties. For instance, analyzing regional variation in voting patterns suggests that the Brexit vote was primarily driven by economic motives rather than by anti-immigrant sentiments. Ironically, though, most evidence suggests that populist governments have a below-average economic performance once in office, the US and Poland being notable exceptions. A key point of Guriev’s presentation was that populism seems to be a good method to obtain power, but, once in power, populists tend to be less successful in promoting citizen welfare. These findings seem to be of high importance given the increasing public support for populist parties around the world and in parts of Eastern Europe
The conference was very well received and on behalf of SITE, the authors would like to express their appreciation to all speakers and participants for sharing their knowledge and to Riksbankens Jubileumsfond for financial support. For those interested to learn more about the papers summarized very briefly above, please visit the conference website and the presenters’ websites as indicated in the text and here below.
Speakers at the Conference
Andreas Stegman, briq – Institute on Behavior and Inequality
Christian Ochsner, CERGE-EI and University of Zurich
Daniel Treisman, University of California, Los Angeles
Galina Zudenkova, TU Dortmund University
Gerhard Toews, New Economic School Moscow
Marvin Suesse, Trinity College
Michal Myck, CenEA
Natalya Naumenko, George Mason University
Ruben Enikolopov, New Economic School Moscow
Scott Gehlbach, University of Chicago
Sergei Guriev, Sciences Po Paris
Tetyana Tyshchuk, Kyiv School of Economics
Timothy Frye, Columbia University
Vasily Korovkin, CERGE-EI
SITE Academic Conference 2019 “The Long Shadow of Transition”
The Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics invites you to our annual Academic Conference at the Stockholm School of Economics which brings together researchers in economics and political science who contribute to our understanding of the political economy of Eastern Europe.
For most countries in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, the main building blocks of the economic transition from a command economy to a market economy took around 10 years to accomplish. In terms of political institutions and social norms, though, change has been much slower and more uneven. Weak political checks and balances, corruption and authoritarianism threaten not only the welfare of citizens within these countries but also peace and cooperation in Europe more generally.
This year’s edition of our annual Academic Conference will focus on the Political Economics of Long run Development in Eastern Europe. There is by now a growing academic literature analyzing not only the current consequences of authoritarianism and corruption but also the economic history of the eastern region and how that can account for some of the norms and institutions in place today. The purpose of this event is to bring together scholars in this field for a fruitful exchange of ideas and presentations of the current academic standing on the topic.
Keynote speakers
- KEYNOTE 1: RUBEN ENIKOLOPOV, Rector and Professor at the New Economic School.
- KEYNOTE 2: DANIEL TREISMAN, Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles.
- KEYNOTE 3: SERGEI GURIEV, Professor of Economics, Sciences Po.
When and where?
Date:
Monday Dec 16, 2019, 9:00 – 17:00.
Tuesday Dec 17, 2019, 10:00 – 14:30
Place: Stockholm School of Economics, KAW Room 1st floor, Bertil Ohlins gata 4.
RSVP: Please note that the number of seats for this event is limited, therefore we kindly ask you to only register if you know that you will be able to attend.
Last day to register: December 13, 12:30 pm.
Read the full program below!
Contact person:
Gun.Malmquist@hhs.se
ACADEMIC CONFERENCE PROGRAM 2019
The Long Shadow of Transition: The State of Democracy in Eastern Europe
In many parts of Eastern Europe, the transition towards stronger political institutions and democratic deepening has been slow and uneven. Weak political checks and balances, corruption and authoritarianism have threatened democracy, economic and social development and adversely impacted peace and stability in Europe at large. This policy brief summarizes the insights from Development Day 2019, a full-day conference organized by SITE at the Stockholm School of Economics on November 12th. The presentations were centred around the current political and business climate in the Eastern European region, throwing light on new developments in the past few years, strides towards and away from democracy, and the challenges as well as possible policy solutions emanating from those.
The State of Democracy in the Region
From a regional perspective, Eastern Europe has seen mixed democratic success over the years with hybrid systems that combine some elements of democracy and autocracy. Based on the V-Dem liberal democracy index, ten transition countries that have joined the EU saw rapid early progress after transition. In comparison, the democratic development in twelve nations of the FSU still outside of the EU has been largely stagnant.
In recent years, however, democracy in some of those EU countries, such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Romania have been in decline. Poland, one of the region’s top performers in terms of GDP growth and life expectancy, has experienced a sharp decline in democracy since 2015. Backlashes have often occurred after elections in which corruption and economic mismanagement have led to the downfall of incumbent governments and a general distrust of the political system. Together with low voter turnout, this created fertile ground for more autocratic forces to gain power helped by demand for strong leadership.
An example from Ukraine illustrated the role of media, both traditional and social, for policy-making. In some countries of the region, traditional media is strictly state-controlled with obvious concerns for democracy. This is less the case in Ukraine, where also social media plays an important role in forming political opinions. The concern is that, as elsewhere, opinions that gain traction on social media may not be impartial or well informed, affecting public perception about policy-making. A recent case showing the popular reaction to an attack on the former governor of the Central Bank suggests that those implementing important reforms may not get due credit when biased and partial information dominates the political discourse on social media.
Another case is the South Caucasian region: Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan. The political situation there has been characterized as a “government by day, government by night” dichotomy, implying that the real political power largely lies outside the official political institutions. In Georgia, the situation can be described as a competition between autocracy and democracy, with a feudalistic system in which powerful groups replace one another across time. As a result, trust in political institutions is low, as well as citizens’ political participation.
In the case of Azerbaijan, there is an elected presidency, but in reality, power has been passed on hereditarily, becoming a de facto patrimonial system. Lastly, in Armenia, the new government possesses democratic credentials, but the tensions with neighbouring Azerbaijan and Turkey have given increasing power to the military and important economic powers. Overall, democratisation in these countries has been hindered by a trend for powerful politicians to form parties around themselves and to retain power after the end of their mandates. Also, the historical focus on nation-building in these countries has led to a marked exclusion of minorities and a conflict of national identities.
The last country case in this part of the conference focused on the current political situation in Russia and on the likely outcomes after 2024. The social framework in Russia appears constellated by fears – a fear of a world war, of regime tightening and mass repressions, and of lawlessness – all of them on the rise. Similarly, the economy is suffering, in particular from low business activity, somewhat offset by a boost in social payments. Nonetheless, it was argued that it is not economic concerns, but rather political frustration, that has recently led citizens to take to the street. Despite this, survey data shows that trust in Putin is still over 60%, and that most people would vote for him again. However, survey data also points out that the most likely determinant of this trust is the lack of another reference figure, and that citizens are not averse to the idea of political change in itself. Lastly, Putin will most likely retain some political power after 2024, transiting “from father to grandfather of the nation”.
Voices from the civil society in the region also emphasized the importance of a free media and an active civil society to prevent the backsliding of democracy. With examples from Georgia and Ukraine, it was argued that maintaining the independence of the judiciary, as well as the public prosecutor’s office, can go a long way in building credibility both among citizens and the international community. The European Union can leverage the high trust and hopeful attitudes it benefits from in the region to push crucial reforms more strongly. For example, more than 70% of Georgians would vote for joining the EU if a referendum was held on the topic and the European Union is widely regarded as Georgia’s most important foreign supporter.
Weak Institutions and Business Development
The quality of political and legal institutions strongly affects the business environment, in particular with regards to the protection of property rights, rule of law, regulation and corruption. Research from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) highlights that the governance gap between Eastern Europe and Central Asia and most advanced economies is still large, even though progress in this area has actually been faster than for other emerging economies since the mid-‘90s. This is measured through enterprise surveys as well as individual surveys. In Albania, for instance, a perception of lower corruption was linked to a decrease in the intention to emigrate equivalent to earning 400$ more per month. Another point concerned the complexity of measuring the business environment and the benefits of firm-level surveys asking firms directly about their own actual experience of regular enforcement. For example, in countries such as Poland, Latvia and Romania the actual experience of business regulation measured via the EBRD’s Business Environment Enterprise Performance Survey, is far worse than one would expect from the World Bank’s well known Doing Business rating.
From the perspective of Swedish firms, trade between Sweden and the region has remained rather flat in the past years, as the complexity and risks of these markets especially discourage SMEs. Business Sweden explained that Swedish firms considering an expansion in these markets are concerned with issues of exchange rate stability, and the institutional-driven presence of unfair competition and of excessive bureaucracy. Moreover, inadequate infrastructure and the presence of bribery and corruption make everyday business operations risky and costly. It was generally emphasized that countries have to create a safe investment environment by reducing corruption, establishing a clear and well enacted regulatory environment, having dependable courts and strengthening domestic resource mobilization. Swedish aid can play a part, but there is a need to develop new ways of delivering aid to make it more effective.
An interesting example is Belarus, that has seen more economic and political stability than most neighbours, but at the same time a lack of both economic and political reforms towards market economy and democracy. Gradually the preference towards private ownership, as opposed to public, has increased in recent years and the country has seen a rising share of the private sector, even without specific privatization reforms. Nonetheless, international businesses are still reluctant to invest due to high taxes, a lack of access to finance as well as to a qualified workforce, but most importantly due to the weak legal system. An exception has been China, and Belarus has looked at the One Belt One Road Initiative as a promising bridge to the EU. Scandals connected with the two main Chinese-invested projects have damped the enthusiasm recently, though.
The economic and political risks of extensively relying on badly diversified energy sources, as is the case with natural gas imports from Russia in many transition states were also discussed. It was shown how some countries such as Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania have improved their energy security by either benefitting from reverse-flow technology and the EU’s bargaining power or building their own LNG terminals to diversify supply sources. However, either of these, as well as other energy security improving solutions are likely to come with an economic cost, though, that not all countries in the region can afford.
A Government Perspective
The main focus of this section was the Swedish government’s new inspiring foreign policy initiative, “Drive for Democracy”. Drawing from a definition of democracy by Kerstin Hesselgren, an early Swedish female parliamentarian, democracy enables countries to realize and utilize the forces of the individual and draw them into a life-giving, value-creating society. It was emphasized that the values of democracy are objectives by themselves (e.g. freedom of expression, respect for human rights) but also that democracy has important positive effects in other areas of human welfare. The Swedish government views democracy as the best foundation for a sustainable society, equality of opportunity and absence of gender or racial bias.
The “Drive for Democracy” specifically identifies Eastern Europe as one of the main frontiers between democracy and autocracy, and the Swedish government promotes human rights and stability through various bilateral programmes through the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Sida, and multilateral initiatives within the EU, such as the Eastern Partnership. It was also emphasized that democracy is a continuous process that can always be improved, as indeed experienced by Sweden. Political rights were granted to women only in 1919 followed by convicts and prisoners in 1933 and to the Roma people only in 1950. Political and democratic rights are thus never once and for all given, and it is crucial that the dividends from democracy are carried forward to the younger generation.
Conclusion
In sum, the day illustrated clearly how democracy engages all segments of society, from the business sector to civil society, and the potential for but also challenges involved for democratic deepening in Eastern Europe. To get more information about the presentations during the day, please visit our website.
Participants at the Conference
- PER OLSSON FRIDH, State Secretary, Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
- ALEXANDER PLEKHANOV, Director for Transition Impact and Global Economics at EBRD.
- TORBJÖRN BECKER, Director, SITE.
- CHLOÉ LE COQ, Associate Professor, SITE and Professor of Economics, University of Paris II Panthéon-Assas.
- THOMAS DE WAAL, Senior Fellow at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- NATALIIA SHAPOVAL, Vice President for Policy Research at Kyiv School of Economics.
- ILONA SOLOGUB, Scientific Editor at VoxUkraine and Director for Policy Research at Kyiv School of Economics.
- KETEVAN VASHAKIDZE, President at Europe Foundation, Georgia.
- MARIA BISTER, Senior Policy Specialist, Sida.
- HENRIK NORBERG, Deputy Director, Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
- YLVA BERG, CEO and President, Business Sweden.
- LARS ANELL, Ambassador and formerly Volvo’s Senior Vice President.
- ERIK BERGLÖF, Professor in Practice and Director of the Institute of Global Affairs, London School of Economics and Political Science.
- KATERYNA BORNUKOVA, Academic Director, BEROC, Minsk.
- ANDREI KOLESNIKOV, Senior Fellow, Carnegie Moscow Center.
Liberal Democracy in Transition – The First 30 Years
This year marks 30 years since the first post-communist election in Poland and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Key events that started a dramatic transition process from totalitarian regimes towards liberal democracy in many countries. This brief presents stylized facts from this process together with some thoughts on how to get this process back on a positive track. In general, the transition countries that joined the EU are still far ahead of the other transition countries in terms of democratic development.
The recent decline in democratic indicators in some EU countries should be taken seriously as they involve reducing freedom of expression and removing constraints on the executive, but should also be discussed in light of the significant progress transition countries entering the EU have shown during the first 30 years of transition. The brief shows that changes in a democracy can happen fast and most often happen around elections, so getting voters engaged in the democratic process is crucially important. This requires politicians that engage the electorate and have an interest in preserving democratic institutions. An important question in the region is what the EU can do to promote this, given its overloaded political agenda. Perhaps it is time for a Greta for democracy to wake up the young and shake up the old.
This brief provides an overview of political developments in transition countries since the first post-communist elections in Poland and the fall of the Berlin Wall 30 years ago. It focuses on establishing stylized facts based on quantitative indices of democracy for a large set of transition countries rather than providing in-depth studies of a small number of countries. The aim of the brief is thus to find common patterns across countries that can inform today’s policy discussion on democracy in the region and inspire future studies of the forces driving democracy in individual transition countries.
The first issue to address is what data to use to establish stylized facts of democratic development in the region. By now, there are several interesting indicators that describe various aspects of democratic development, which are produced by different organizations, academic institutions and private data providers. In this brief, three commonly used and well-respected data providers will be compared in the initial section before we zoom in on more specific factors that make up one of these indices.
The big picture
The three indicators that we look at first are: political rights produced by Freedom House; polity 2 produced by the Polity IV project; and the liberal democracy index produced by the V-Dem project. Figures 1-3 show the unweighted average of these indicators for two groups of countries. The EU10 are the transition countries that became EU members in 2004 and 2007 and include Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. The second group, FSU12, are the 12 countries that came out of the Soviet Union minus the three Baltic countries in the EU10 group, so the FSU12 group consists of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
Figure 1. Freedom House

Source: Freedom House and author’s calculations
Note: Scale inverted, 1 is best and 7 worst score
Figure 2. Polity IV project

Source: Polity IV project and author’s calculations
Note: Scale from -10 (fully autocratic) to 10 (fully democratic)
Figure 3. V-Dem

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
Note: Scale from 0 to 1 where higher is more democratic
All three indicators convey the message that the democratic transformation in the EU10 group was very rapid in the early years of transition and the indicators have remained at high levels since the mid-90s only to show some decline in the most recent years for two of the three indicators. The FSU12 set of countries have made much less progress in terms of democratic development and remain far behind the EU10 countries in this regard. Overall, there is little evidence at the aggregate level that the democratic gap between the EU10 and FSU12 groups is closing. While the average EU10 country is more or less a full-fledged democracy, the average FSU12 country is at the lower end of the spectrum for all three democracy measures.
The average indicators in Figures 1-3 obviously hide some interesting developments in individual countries and in the following analysis, we will take a closer look at the liberal democracy index at the country level. We will then investigate what sub-indices contribute to changes in the aggregate index in the countries that have experienced significant declines in their liberal democracy scores.
For the first part of the analysis, it is useful to break down the democratic development in two phases. The first phase is from the onset of transition (1989, 1991 or 1993 depending on the specific country) to the time of the global financial crisis in 2009 and the second phase is from 2009 to 2018 (the last data point).
Figure 4. Liberal democracy, the first phase

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
Figures 4 and 5 compare how the liberal democracy indicator changes from the first year of the period (measured on the horizontal axis) to the last year of the period (on the vertical axis). The smaller blue dots are the individual countries that make up the EU10 group while the red dots are the FSU12 countries. The 45-degree line indicates when there is no change between start and end years, while observations that lie below (above) the line indicate a deterioration (improvement) of the liberal democracy index in a specific country.
In the first phase of transition (Figure 4), all of the EU10 countries increased their liberal democracy scores and the average increase for the group was almost 0.5, going from 0.26 to 0.74. This was a result of many of the countries in the group making significant improvements without any countries deteriorating. The FSU12 group had a very different development with the average not changing at all since the few countries that improved (Georgia and Ukraine) were counterbalanced by a significant decline in Belarus and a more modest decline in Armenia.
Figure 5. Liberal democracy, the second phase

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
The very rapid improvement in the liberal democracy index in the EU10 countries in the first phase of transition came to a halt and also reversed in several countries in the second phase of transition. Of course, as they had improved so much in the first period, there was less room for further positive developments, but the rapid decline in some of the countries was still negative news. However, it does point towards that reform momentum was very strong in the EU accession process, but once a country had entered the union, the pressure for liberal democratic reforms has faded.
Overall, the EU10 average fell by 0.1 from 2009 to 2018. This was a result of declining scores in several countries. The particularly large declines in this period have been seen in Hungary (-0.28), Poland (-0.27), Bulgaria (-0.14), the Czech Republic (-0.14), and Romania (-0.12). Again, the average FSU12 score did not change much, although Ukraine (-0.2) put its early success in reverse and lost as much in this period as it had gained earlier.
Country developments
Since much of the current discussion centers on how democracy is being under attack, the figures name the countries that have seen significant declines in the liberal democracy score in the first or second phase of transition. Figures 6 and 7 show the time-series of the liberal democracy index in the countries with significant drops at some stage of the transition process.
Figure 6. FSU12 decliners

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
In many countries, the drop comes suddenly and sharply, with the first and most prominent example being Belarus. There, it only took three years to go from one of the highest ranked FSU12 countries to fall to one of the lowest liberal democracy scores. In Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and Armenia, the process was also very rapid and significant changes happened in 2-3 years.
Figure 7. EU10 decliners

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
In the Czech Republic and Hungary, the period of decline was much longer and in the case of Hungary, the drop was the most significant in the EU10 group. Ukraine stands out as more of an exception with a roller-coaster development in its liberal democracy score that first took it up the list and then back down to where it started. For those familiar with politics in these countries, it is easy to identify the elections and change in government that have occurred at the times the index has started to fall in all of these countries. In other words, the democratic declines have not started with coups but followed election outcomes where in most cases the incumbent leaders have been replaced by a new person or party.
How democracy came under attack
We will now take a closer look at what has been behind the instances of decline in the aggregate index by investigating how the sub-indices have developed in these countries. The sub-indices that build up the liberal democracy index are: freedom of expression and alternative sources of information; freedom of association; share of population with suffrage; clean elections; elected officials; equality before the law and individual liberty; judicial constraints on the executive; and legislative constraints on the executive (the structure is a bit more complex with mid-level indices, see V-Dem 2019a).
Table 1 shows how these indicators have changed in the time period the liberal democracy indicator has fallen significantly (with shorter versions of the longer names listed above but in the same order). The heat map of decline indicated by the different colours is constructed such that positive changes are marked with green, smaller declines are without colour, declines greater that 0.1 but smaller than 0.2 are in yellow and larger declines in red. Note that the liberal democracy index is not an average of the sub-indices but based on a more sophisticated aggregation technique (see V-Dem 2019b). Therefore, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria can have a greater fall in top-level liberal democracy index that what is indicated by the sub-indices.
Table 1. Changes in liberal democracy indicators at times of democratic decline

Source: V-Dem project and author’s calculations
For the countries with the largest changes in the liberal democracy index, it is clear that both freedom of expression and alternative sources of information have come under attack together with reduced judicial and legislative constraints on the executive. Among the EU10 countries, Hungary and Poland stand out in terms of reducing freedom of expression, while Romania has seen most of the decline coming from reducing constraints on the executive. Not surprisingly, Belarus stands out in terms of the overall decline in liberal democracy coming from reducing both freedom of expression and constraints on the executive in the most significant way.
On a more general level, the attack on democracy does differ between the countries, but in the cases where serious declines can be seen, the attack has been particularly focused on information aspects and constraints on the executive. At the same time, all countries let all people vote (suffrage always at 1) and let the one with the most votes get the job (elected officials).
Policy conclusions
This brief has provided some stylized facts on the first 30 years of liberal democracy in transition and some details on how democracy has come under attack in individual countries. It leaves open many questions that require further studies and some of these are indeed ongoing in this project and will be presented in future briefs and policy papers here.
Some observations have already been made here that can inform policy discussions on liberal democratic developments in the region. The first is that changes can happen very rapidly, both in terms of improvements but also in terms of dismantling important democratic institutions, including those that provide constraints on the executive or media that provides unbiased coverage before and after elections. What is also noteworthy is that these changes have almost always happened after an election where a new person or party has come to power, so the democratic system is used to introduce less democracy in this sense.
It is also interesting that in all of the countries, the most easily observed indicators of democracy such as suffrage and having the chief executive or legislature being appointed by elections are given the highest possible scores. In other words, even the most autocratic regime wants to look like a democracy; but as the old saying goes, “it is not who votes that is important, it is who counts”.
The regime changes at election times that have led to declining liberal democracy scores have also in many cases come as a result of the incumbents not doing a great job or voters not turning up to vote. It was enough for Lukashenko in Belarus to promise to deal with corruption and rampant inflation that was a result of the old guard’s mismanagement to turn Belarus into an autocracy. In Hungary, the change of regime came after the Socialist leader was caught on tape saying he had been lying to voters. While in Romania, only 39% voted in the 2016 election. And in Bulgaria, around half of the voters stayed at home in the presidential election the same year.
In sum, both incompetent and corrupt past leaders and disengaged or disillusioned voters are part of the decline in a liberal democracy that we have seen in recent years. It is clearly time for policy makers that are interested in preserving liberal democracy in the region and elsewhere to think hard about how democracy can be saved from illiberal democrats. Part of the answer clearly will have to do with how voters can be engaged in the democratic process and take part in elections. It also involves defending free independent media and the thinkers and doers that contribute to the liberal democracy that we cherish. The question is if the young generation will find a Greta for democracy that can kick-start a new transition to liberal democracy in the region and around the world.
For those readers that want to participate more actively in this discussion and have a chance to be in Stockholm on November 12, SITE is organizing a conference on this theme which is open to the public. For more information on the conference, please visit SITE’s website (see here).
References
- Freedom house data downloaded on Oct 4, 2019, from https://freedomhouse.org/content/freedom-world-data-and-resources
- Freedom house methodological note available at https://freedomhouse.org/report/methodology-freedom-world-2018
- Polity IV project data downloaded on Oct 4, 2019, from http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscrdata.html
- Polity IV project manual available at http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2018.pdf
- V-Dem project data downloaded on Sept 24, 2019, from https://www.v-dem.net/en/data/data-version-9/
- Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, David Altman, Michael Bernhard, M. Steven Fish, Adam Glynn, Allen Hicken, Anna Lührmann, Kyle L. Marquardt, Kelly McMann, Pamela Paxton, Daniel Pemstein, Brigitte Seim, Rachel Sigman, Svend-Erik Skaaning, Jeffrey Staton, Steven Wilson, Agnes Cornell, Lisa Gastaldi, Haakon Gjerløw, Nina Ilchenko, Joshua Krusell, Laura Maxwell, Valeriya Mechkova, Juraj Medzihorsky, Josefine Pernes, Johannes von Römer, Natalia Stepanova, Aksel Sundström, Eitan Tzelgov, Yi-ting Wang, Tore Wig, and Daniel Ziblatt. 2019a. “V-Dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v9”, Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem)
- Pemstein, Daniel, Kyle L. Marquardt, Eitan Tzelgov, Yi-ting Wang, Juraj Medzihorsky, Joshua Krusell, Farhad Miri, and Johannes von Römer. 2019b. “The V-Dem Measurement Model: Latent Variable Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-Temporal Expert-Coded Data”, V-Dem Working Paper No. 21. 4th edition. University of Gothenburg: Varieties of Democracy Institute.
CenEA and FREE Network Conference “Policy Lessons After 30 Years of Research on Transition”
To celebrate 30 years since the 1989 parliamentary elections which paved the way to political and economic transformation in Poland and initiated the overthrow of the communist rule in the region of Central and Eastern Europe, CenEA and the FREE Network organize a conference “Policy Lessons After 30 Years of Research on Transition”.
The conference will be organised in the European Solidarity Centre in Gdańsk on 13.09.2019 and will include guest lectures by prof. Leszek Balcerowicz, prof. Erik Berglof and prof. Jeffrey Sachs (via livecast), as well as panel discussions involving academics and policymakers, specialized in the topic of the post-communist transition.
The FREE Network – the Forum for Research on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies – brings together researchers from Kiev (KSE), Minsk (BEROC), Moscow (NES/CEFIR), Riga (SSE/BICEPS), Stockholm (SSE/SITE), Szczecin (CenEA) and Tbilisi (ISET) and promotes academic research and education in economics in the region of Central and Eastern Europe. Representatives from all of the participating institutions will take part in the conference.
Detailed program of the conference can be found below. The conference is open to the public, but registration is required and places are limited. To participate in the conference all participants should register via email admin@cenea.org.pl.
International Conference on Gender Economics: Removing Obstacles to Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment
The FREE Network and the International School of Economics at TSU (ISET) and its Policy Institute, are delighted to extend a warm invitation to participate in an international conference on gender economics entitled: “Removing Obstacles to Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment”.
The conference will be held in Tbilisi, Georgia, on 15-16th November 2019. The conference is organized as part of the FROGEE initiative – the Forum for Research on Gender Economics – supported by the Swedish International Development Agency (Sida) and coordinated by the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE).
The objective of the conference is bringing together researchers, policy-makers, and the broader development community to discuss the obstacles to gender equality and women’s economic empowerment, and policies to remove existing constraints, with a focus on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies.
Our aim is to contribute to the development of national and regional agendas pursuing the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (see UN’s portal here), with a particular focus on Gender Equality (SDG 5), critical to achieving 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
We are currently accepting abstracts (max 500 words) presenting research on, but not limited to, the following topics:
- Gender discrimination in the labour market
- Gender gap in labour force participation
- Gender gap in the allocation of time to unpaid care and domestic work
- Gender gap in leadership positions at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life
- Gender gap in the access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property, financial services, inheritance and natural resources.
For all topics, we welcome papers analyzing the causes of the gender gaps and/or potential policy solutions (including the evaluation of the impacts of projects and policies that have already been implemented inside or outside the region).
Important Dates:
Conference dates: 15-16 November 2019. Deadline for abstract submissions: July/10/2019. Notification of acceptance: Jul/31/2019. Full-paper submission deadline, for accepted abstracts: Oct/15/2019.
For more information, please visit the conference website
Institutions and Comparative Advantage in Services Trade
Recent studies have highlighted the role of human capital and good economic institutions in establishing a comparative advantage in trade in complex institutions-intensive goods. We show that the effect of institutions on comparative advantage in services trade is quite different: in fact, countries with bad institutions rely significantly more on services exports. More specifically, as the quality of institutions deteriorates, information technology sector (ICT) services exports as a share of total ICT exports increase significantly and countries with worse institutions get a substantial comparative advantage in the provision of ICT services. This is especially applicable to transitional economies characterized by high, arguably exogenous, human capital at the level of most advanced countries.
Introduction
Recent research in international trade has demonstrated that institutions influence the determination of comparative advantage in the trade of goods. Countries with strong domestic institutions have a significant comparative advantage in producing complex, institutions-intensive goods while countries with weak institutions tend to specialize in less complex goods. Through this channel, weak institutions can hinder growth and development (Nunn and Trefler, 2014).
We argue that the role of institutions in services trade can differ significantly from the one in trade in goods. The intuition behind it is that services provision often relies less on institution-driven factors, such as public infrastructure, availability of large number of inputs, property rights and capital investments than the production of complex goods.
We show, in the case of the information technology sector (ICT), that countries with bad institutions rely significantly more on services exports even after controlling for human capital input requirements and availability. We focus on the ICT sector to isolate the differences in the role of institutions in determining comparative advantage in goods and services. Both ICT goods and services provision are equally intensive in human capital and thus present a good opportunity to study differences between goods and services provision.
Our study is motivated by high ICT services exports (e.g. software development) and low ICT goods exports (e.g. computers, phones, etc.) of transition countries which are known to have high human capital and low institutional indicators.
Institutions and ICT Services Exports
Figure illustrates the high human capital availability of transitions economies and weak domestic institutions relative to other countries. Specifically, we categorize countries into four groups: 23 most developed economies (e.g. USA, Canada, Japan and Western European economies); new members of the European Union (a group of 13 countries including Poland, Slovakia, and Baltic countries); transition economies group consists of 17 mostly post-Soviet countries including Russia, Ukraine, Belarus; the most numerous fourth group includes more than hundred other developing countries.
Figure 1. Institutions quality and schooling by country groups
1a

Source: Authors’ calculations, schooling data from Barro and Lee (2013)
1b

Source: Authors’ calculations, institutional indicators data from the World Bank World Governance Indicators
Figure 1a presents an average number of years of schooling, our measure of human capital, for each country group in 2000 and 2010 (the years are chosen based on data availability). The human capital is at a similar level in the most developed economies, EU-13 and transition economies, but significantly lower in other developing countries. Figure 1b illustrates the average institutional quality for each group in 2000 and 2010. Institutional quality for each country is calculated as an average of six indicators, distributed approximately from -2.5 to 2.5: control of corruption, government effectiveness, political stability, rule of law, regulatory quality, voice and accountability, with a lower value corresponding to worse institutional quality. In contrast to education, the average institutional quality of transition economies, although improving from 2000, remains on average lower than the institutional quality of other developing countries.
Consistent with the literature on institutions and comparative advantage in relationship and investment-intensive goods production, ICT goods export from transition economies is significantly lower than in other countries. In contrast, ICT services exports is at a higher level and faster growth in transition economies than in other countries.
Belarus presents a good motivating example. On the one hand, fundamental education in Belarus is at a level of the most advanced countries, which allows 21 universities in the country to educate about 7,000 graduates in IT industry in a year. On the other hand, ICT services exports in Belarus is thriving: over the last 10 years, the growth of ICT services is an eightfold increase (it was 150M USD in 2008 and 1.2B USD in 2017). Nowadays, Belarus is one of the world leaders in ICT services exports per capita. At the same time, ICT goods export is not growing even close to the level of ICT services exports. Over the same time period, it has grown only by about 30 percent: in 2008 ICT goods export was 105M USD, in 2016 – 140M USD (BELARUS.BY, 2019).
The importance of ICT services exports in transition economies is seen in Figure 2. The figure presents ICT services exports as a share of total exports of ICT goods and services. To obtain values for each country group, we average ICT services shares across countries within each group.
Figure 2. ICT services exports as share of total ICT exports

Source: Authors’ calculations, ICT services export data from Trademap, ICT goods export data from WDI
As Figure 2 shows, the average share of ICT services exports in transition economies is higher than the share of ICT services exports in all other groups of countries. Transition economies, characterized by high human capital and weak institutional quality, specialize in exports of services over goods in their ICT exports. This descriptive evidence suggests that abundant human capital, inherited from the USSR and arguably exogenous, shifts to services within the human capital intensive ICT sector when facing weak institutions.
Empirical panel analysis confirms the descriptive evidence. To test our hypothesis, we use the share of ICT services in total ICT exports as a dependent variable and we show that quality of institutions is a significant determinant. Our regressions show that the higher the quality of institutions is, the lower will the share of ICT services in total ICT exports be. Moreover, regression analysis allows us to quantify this dependence: as the quality of institutions increases by 1, which is approximately the difference between Belarus and Georgia (as can be seen in figure 3 below), the share of ICT goods in total ICT services increases by about 20%.
Institutions as a source of comparative advantage in services
To explore the role of institutions in the relative services provision within a sector further, we look at comparative advantage in exporting ICT services. We incorporate a measure similar to Relative Share measure used in Levchenko (2007) for the analysis of comparative advantage in goods export. The measure effectively compares the share of ICT services export for a given country with the world average. The index of revealed comparative advantage in ICT services over ICT goods is computed for country in the following way:

where is share of ICT services exports in total ICT exports for country, is the export of ICT services for all countries, and is the total ICT export (goods plus services) for all countries.
We look at the revealed comparative advantage index across our group of transition economies in figure 3 and see that even within this group, there is a negative correlation between institutions quality and revealed comparative advantage in ICT services.
Figure 3. Revealed Comparative Advantage and Institutions Quality

Source: Authors’ calculations
Countries with high institutional quality, like Georgia, export relatively more goods compared to services. Countries with low institutional quality, like Ukraine and Belarus, have a comparative advantage in ICT services exports.
We hypothesize that the main mechanism responsible for this is as follows. Poor institutional quality, resulting in, for example, corruption and the impossibility to create binding contracts does not allow the countries to produce complex goods in the ICT industry, while the presence of high human capital in these countries allows them to produce ICT services that much less depend on corruption and contracting inefficiencies but are as intensive in human capital as ICT goods.
For a better understanding of the relationship between institutions and comparative advantage determination, we run panel regressions analysing the probability of having a comparative advantage in ICT services in exports of ICT goods and services as a function of institutional quality. Following Balassa (1965), a country has a comparative advantage in ICT services if the share of services in overall ICT exports is higher than the world average, in other words, revealed comparative advantage index is greater than 1. We find that one unit increase in institutional quality reduces the probability of having a comparative advantage in services by about 25%, which means that a country with institutional quality similar to Georgia is about 25% less likely to have comparative advantage than a country with institutional quality similar to Belarus.
Conclusion
In this brief we have discussed the role of institutions in determining comparative advantage in services. Our study argues that, given high human capital, low quality institutions create comparative advantage in services provision. Since low quality institutions act as an implicit tax on the production of complex goods, rational agents reallocate most resources to the production of services that are less sensitive to the institutional quality, while still requiring high level of human capital. We showed that transition economies are characterized by low institutions quality and high human capital. At the same time, transition economies have the highest share of ICT services export in total ICT export. We also showed that institutions negatively affect comparative advantage in ICT services export. Our results suggest that services exports can be a novel development channel for countries with weak institutional, capital investments and infrastructure. Specialization in high-value added services exports provides opportunity for fostering high human capital.
References
- Arshavskiy, Victor, Arevik Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan and Aleh Mazol, 2019. “Institutions and Comparative Advantage in Service Trade”, Working paper
- Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalisation and “revealed” comparative advantage 1. The Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies, 33(2), 99-123.
- Barro, Robert J. and Jong Wha Lee, 2013. “A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010”, Journal of Development Economics, vol. 104, pp 184-198
- Levchenko, Andrei A., 2007. “Institutional Quality and International Trade”, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 74, pp 791-819.
- Nunn, Nathan and Daniel Trefler, 2014. “Domestic Institutions as a Source of Comparative Advantage”, Handbook of International Economics, Volume 4, Chapter 5, pp 263-315.
- BELARUS.BY, 2019. “ИТ в Беларуси”, it-belarus, accessed on May 19, 2019
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in policy briefs and other publications are those of the authors; they do not necessarily reflect those of the FREE Network and its research institutes.