What is it about?
With accession, ‘Old’ Europe managed a profit at the expense of the 'New' one. This was caused by trade asymmetries and by deindustrialisation of new member states. Migration from accession countries thus became a source of cheap labour. The EU enlargement has many losers – in both the old and the new EU, and the The Euro does not appear to have helped accession countries or the EU Southern periphery.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Three decades after the fall of the Berlin wall and one and a half decades after the Big Bang enlargement of the European Union (2004-2007), it is a good moment to revisit contrasting narratives about the benefit of both free trade and the EU enlargement for Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. The analysis of the paper goes against a dominant narratives of enlargement as a win win for all.
Perspectives
We are comparing the enlargement events in Central and Eastern Europe with the patterns of de-industrialisation and migration that took place in Latin America after a similar free trade shock starting in the 1970s. If our reading is correct the European Union can take stock from these lessons.
Professor Andrea Saltelli
University Pompeo Fabra, Barcelona School of Management
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The opening of Central and Eastern European countries to free trade: A critical assessment, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, September 2021, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.strueco.2021.04.005.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
