EconStor >
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin >
Department of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences, Humboldt-Universität Berlin >
CEESA Discussion Papers, HU Berlin >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/22286
  

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGatzweiler, Franzen_US
dc.contributor.authorHagedorn, Konraden_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-01-29T14:55:37Z-
dc.date.available2009-01-29T14:55:37Z-
dc.date.issued2001en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/22286-
dc.description.abstractThis paper aims at explaining the role and importance of the evolution of institutions for sustainable agri-environments during the transition process by referring to examples of agri-environmental problems faced in Central and Eastern European countries. It is often stated that the replacement of institutional structures in post socialist countries would bring a unique opportunity to implement new policies and institutions needed to ensure that economic growth is environmentally sustainable. This idea stems from the assumption that the breakdown of the socialist system resembles that (of the Schumpeterian1 type) of creative destruction – a process that incessantly revolutionizes economic structures from within. However, not all kinds of institutions, especially at local level, can simply be implemented, and even more, not incessantly. Instead, they evolve as a response to ecosystem and social system characteristics, and this is a rather slow process. A central question therefore is whether the required institutional arrangements for achieving sustainability in the area of agrienvironmental resource management can be built more easily in periods of transition as they fill institutional gaps, or whether processes of transition make institution building a more difficult and far more time consuming task than previously thought. Above all, we want to find out, how these two processes of institution building at different scales affect the sustainable management of resources such as water and biodiversity in agriculture? It will become clear that the agrienvironmental problem areas faced during transition are complex and dynamic and require adequate institutions both by political design and from the grassroots, to be developed by the respective actors involved. Transition from centrally planned to pluralistic systems has to be considered as a particular and in some respect non-typical process of institutional change. Popular theories of institutional change do not necessarily apply. The privatisation experience from many CEE countries will serve as an example. Finally, we will provide some examples of missing or insufficient interaction between political actors or agencies and people in CEE countries. Substantial investments into social and human capital, particularly regarding informal institutions are needed for institutions of sustainability to evolve.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisheren_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCEESA discussion paper / Humboldt-Universität Berlin, Department of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences 4en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.stwInstitutioneller Wandelen_US
dc.subject.stwSystemtransformationen_US
dc.subject.stwÜbergangswirtschaften_US
dc.subject.stwNachhaltige Entwicklungen_US
dc.subject.stwLandwirtschaften_US
dc.subject.stwOsteuropaen_US
dc.titleThe evolution of institutions in transitionen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn497477599en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen-
Appears in Collections:CEESA Discussion Papers, HU Berlin

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
DP4_Gatzweiler_Hagedorn.pdf204.91 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.