SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  12
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115                                                                  UDC 339.137.2 (497.11)
Received: 17 April 2010; Accepted: 16 March 2011.                                                 DOI: 10.2298/PAN1201105S
                                                                                                           Professional paper




Nebojša Savić                              Comparative Analysis Based on
                                           New Competitiveness Index
Faculty of Economics,
Finance and Administration – FEFA,
Serbia
   nsavic@fefa.edu.rs


                                           Summary: The current economic crisis points out to an even greater need to
                                           improve competitiveness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have
                                           succeeded in increasing their competitiveness scores and decreasing the dif-
                                           ference relative to advanced countries. The countries of Central and South
                                           Eastern Europe, to which Serbia belongs, have recorded an increase in their
                                           score by 0.3 on average, whereby the region of South Eastern Europe has
                                           achieved poorer results. During the period 2005-2011, Serbia recorded an
                                           increase in its score by 0.5, from 3.38 to 3.88. In 2011, Serbia was ranked 95th
                                           among 142 countries, with the score of 3.88. This is a decline relative to 2008
                                           and 2005, when Serbia was ranked 85th with the scores of 3.38 and 3.90 re-
                                           spectively. However, this increase was not sufficient to improve Serbia’s rank-
                                           ing, which shows that other countries were more successful. This faces Serbia
This paper is part of a research project   with the task to strengthen its efforts towards improving competitiveness.
"Improving Serbia’s competitiveness in
the process of accessing the European
Union”, number 47028, for the period       Key words: Competitiveness, Porter’s diamond, Productivity, Serbia.
2010/2014, which is supported by
Ministry of Education and Science of
the Republic of Serbia.                    JEL: F23, O57.




The current economic crisis points to an even greater need to improve competitive-
ness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have succeded in increasing their
competitiveness scores and decreasing the difference relative to advanced countries
(Xavier Sala-I-Martin et al. 2011). The countries of Central and South Eastern
Europe, to which Serbia belongs, have recorded an increase in their score by 0.3 on
average, whereby the region of South Eastern Europe has achieved poorer results.
During the period 2005-2011, Serbia recorded an increase in its score by 0.5, from
3.38 to 3.88.
       The aim of this paper is to assess Serbia’s competitiveness position in 2011
and define recommendations for improving it.

1. The Methodology of Competitiveness Assessment
The significance of improving national competitiveness is a widely accepted. In or-
der to define this concept in an adequate way, it is necessary to proceed from the im-
provement of the standard of living of all citizens as the foundation of national pros-
perity.
        Productivity depends on the value of goods and services expressed in the
world prices achieved by an economy and on the efficiency of that production. Rais-
ing the productivity level enables a country to follow the path based on high wages,
attractive returns on capital and a strong currency, accompanied by a high standard of
106     Nebojša Savić



      living. The standard of living, that is prosperity, is determined by an economy's pro-
      ductivity level, which is expressed by the value of goods and services produced per
      unit of human capital, physical capital and natural resources used in their production
      (Michael Porter et al. 2008).
              The market value is created only by companies, which are limited only by the
      intensity of their innovation and dynamism. Although the government plays a sig-
      nificant role in the provision of conditions that enable value creation, it cannot create
      value.
              Raising competitiveness is the process of improving the business environment,
      which enables a rise in domestic investment, foreign and domestic investment in-
      flows, exports, imports and the like. Each of these factors depends on a country's
      level of competitiveness. Domestic and foreign investors will not invest their capital
      in a country unless it offers an attractive value proposition, while its exports will be-
      gin to increase only when its products obtain necessary quality, based on efficient
      production. Direct government subsidies for a rise in exports, investments and the
      number of innovations contribute only modestly to a rise in productivity.
              In 2008, Porter and his associates made synthetic competitiveness index - New
      Global Competitiveness Index (NGCI) (Porter et al. 2008). The NGCI is concen-
      trated on the determinants of an economy's sustainable level of productivity, while
      the level of competitiveness is the ultimate agent of national prosperity. The NGCI is
      calculated on the basis of public data and a unique opinion survey, which have also
      been used in the GCR so far.
              Competitiveness is what determines the productivity with which endowments
      are used to create goods and services (Porter et al. 2008, p. 45). The aim of the NGCI
      is to identify the sources of productivity. Therefore, according to the NGCI, a coun-
      try’s level of competitiveness is determined by the following three factors (Porter et
      al. 2008, pp. 45-48): (i) endowments; (ii) macroeconomic competitiveness; and (iii)
      microeconomic competitiveness.
              In the theory of competitiveness endowments include available natural re-
      sources, a country’s geographical location and the size of the domestic market and
      populations. Whether these resources will be put in the service of a country’s pros-
      perity depends primarily on the policies being implemented (in this respect, the ex-
      periences of countries are widely varied).
              In essence, this determinant of competitiveness is related to the level of pro-
      ductivity with which se use natural resources, available human capital and the like.
              The second determinant of competitiveness is macroeconomic competitive-
      ness which consists of the following two components: (i) macroeconomic policies
      (MP); and (ii) social infrastructure and political institutions (SIPI). The factors of
      macroeconomic competitiveness have an indirect impact on the productivity level of
      firms due to which they are very important but not sufficient for raising productivity.
      The second factor of macroeconomic competitiveness is the SIPI, which is primarily
      linked to institutions (Douglass C. North 1990). The three most important compo-
      nents of the SIPI are: available basic human capital, political institutions and the rule
      of law.



      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index        107



       The general context for improving the current level of competitiveness is cre-
ated on this second layer of competitiveness.
       The third and the most important determinant is microeconomic competitive-
ness. It is the most important due to the fact that is only one dimension of competi-
tiveness which has a direct impact on a company’s productivity level. The main
components of microeconomic competitiveness are company sophistication and
strategy (COS), the quality of the national business environment (NBE) and the state
of cluster development (SCD), which is closely related to agglomeration economics.
       Value is created only on this layer of competitiveness due to which it has a di-
rect impact on the level of productivity. In view of the fact that value is created only
by firms, it is crucial that business environment quality, which is the most important
component of this determinant of competitiveness, is at a higher level.

2. An Assessment of Serbia’s Competitiveness Based on the
NGCI
In continuation we will analyze Serbia’s competitiveness position based on the GCR
data for 2011-2011. According to the level of GDPpc adjusted by purchasing power
parity Serbia holds 70th place in the world, which should also correspond to its com-
petitiveness level. We have analyzed all four components of Porter’s diamond using
more than 100 subindices.
        The first analysis of Serbian competitiveness based on this new methodology
was made a year ago (Nebojša Savić 2010).
        Our assessment, based on extensive calculation, has shown that in the period
2005-2008 Serbia’s SIPI was 70. In other words Serbia falls into the group of the
first seventy countries in the world. We have obtained such a rank using a somewhat
shorter series than the one used by Porter and associates (it covered the period 2002-
2008).
        We have defined as competitive disadvantages or advantages all ranks that de-
viate up to 10 places upward or downward from the SIPI rank (according to which
Serbia ranked 70th). All ranks from 1st to 59th (compared to the SIPI) are treated as
competitive advantages, while all ranks from 81st to 142nd (compared to SIPI) as
competitive disadvantages.
        We begin an empirical analysis with the quality assessment of the business
environment. The superior method for this assessment is the implementation of Por-
ter’s diamond framework, because it enables a comprehensive view of productivity
through four elements of the national business environment – factor conditions, de-
mand conditions, the context for firm strategy and rivalry, and related and supported
industries (Porter 2008a, pp. 171-211).
        Factor conditions. – Globalization and a rise in the volume of trade have in-
creased the demand for transport and communication infrastructure, capital market
infrastructure and quality education. The development level of physical infrastruc-
ture, available capital and quality of education, especially higher education embodied
in human resources (Alan B. Krueger and Michael Lindahl 2001; Robert Barro
2002), have a very favourable effect on prosperity. Administrative infrastructure, that


                                                                        PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
108     Nebojša Savić



      is, bureaucratic red tape, is also of great significance. In recent times, this component
      has been regarded as being significant for competitiveness, primarily thanks to the
      analyses conducted by the World Bank (Antonio Ciccone and Elias Papaionnou
      2007; World Bank 2009).
             Serbia has significant competitive advantages in the part of communication in-
      frastructure, thanks to the number of telephone lines and computers, and in the part
      of innovation infrastructure, thanks to the tertiary enrollment and the quality of
      mathematics and scientific education. Also, there is an advantage in getting credit on
      capital market infrastructure.

      Table 1 Relative Position of Serbia’s Factor Conditions in 2011
      Competitive advantages                                       Competitive disadventages
       Capital Market Infrastructure                               Logistical Infrastructure
         doing business-getting credit                     +55      quality of port infrastructure                          -63
                                                                     quality of air transport                                -62
       Communication Infrastructure                                  quality of roads                                        -61
         telephone lines                                   +44      quality of rail road infrastructure                     -32
         mobile telephone subscribers                      +42
                                                                   Capital Market Infrastructure
       Innovation Infrastructure                                     protection of minority shareholders’ interests          -70
         tertiary enrollment                               +20      venture capital availability                            -51
         quality of math & science education               +12      regulation of security exchange                         -51
         quality of scientific research institutions        +9      soundness of banks                                      -46
                                                                     financial market sophistication                         -33
       Administrative Infrastructure
         time required to start business                   +19    Administrative Infrastructure
                                                                     paying taxes                                            -68
                                                                     burden of government regulation                         -23
                                                                     burden of custom procedures                             -23

                                                                   Innovation Infrastructure
                                                                      brain drain                                            -69
                                                                      quality of management schools                          -44
                                                                      quality of educational system                          -41

      Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc
      and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report.
                                                                                 Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).


             However, competitive disadvantages in this component are very pronounced
      and show that the basic weaknesses of Serbia’s competitiveness are hidden just in
      this segment of business environment. The unsustainably low level of Serbia’s com-
      petitiveness due to competitive disadvantages in logistical infrastructure, capital
      market infrastructure, administrative infrastructure and innovation infrastructure have
      substantively ranked Serbia very low. Factor conditions are the crucial component of
      the diamond that reduces Serbia’s level of competitiveness.
             Context for strategy and rivalry. – The context for firm strategy and rivalry
      has a significant impact on the way in which companies use factor conditions. The
      high level of competition on the local market is important for achieving high per-
      formance (Porter and Mariko Sakakibara 2004; William W. Lewis 2004; Wendy
      Carlin, Mark Schaffer, and Paul Seabright 2005). Competition determines firms’ en-

      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index        109



try and exit. Since competition is so significant, the government’s influence on pro-
ductivity is of great significance, especially through tax incentives, competition law,
etc.
        Numerous studies have confirmed that there is a close link between openness
and growth (Jefrrey Sachs and Andrew Warner 1995; Jeffrey A. Frankel and David
Roamer 1999; David Dollar and Aart Kraay 2002; Robert Baldwin 2003).
        Competitive advantages in the strategy and rivalry context are connected with
openness and vigorous local competition and with rules and incentives which en-
courage investment and productivity. In this respect Serbia has many competitive
disadvantages due to the very seriously endangered market character of the Serbian
economy.
        According to the local competition the following major weaknesses have been
manifested: market dominance, efficiency of anti-trust policy and intensity of local
competition.
        Rules and incentives also generate weaknesses in the field of FDI inflow, taxa-
tion, prevalence of foreign ownership and corporate governance.
        The manifested weaknesses point to the need for profound changes within
structural adjustment, including both the role of government and the strengthening of
rivalry on the domestic market, so that the Serbian economy can obtain all character-
istics of a market economy.

Table 2      Relative Position of Serbia’s Context for Strategy and Rivalry in 2011
Competitive advantages                                      Competitive disadvantages
     strength of investor protection                 +10         extent of market dominance                            -69
                                                                  extent of anti-trust policy                           -67
                                                                  local competition                                     -66
                                                                  efficiency of corporate boards                        -66
                                                                  cooperation in labor-employer relation                -66
                                                                  impact of rules on FDI                                -55
                                                                  extent and effect of taxation                         -48
                                                                  prevalence of foreign ownership                       -46
                                                                  strength of auditing and reporting standards          -44
                                                                  FDI and technology transfer                           -40
                                                                  pay and productivity                                  -33

Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc
and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report.
                                                                            Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).




       Related and supporting industries. – In the segment of related and support-
ing industries Serbia has no competitive advantage. The dominant characteristic of
this segment is the low level of cluster development and availability of latest tech-
nologies. Weaknesses are also reflected in the local availability of research and train-
ing services and low level quality and quantity of local suppliers.




                                                                                           PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
110     Nebojša Savić



      Table 3 Relative Position of Serbia’s Supporting and Related Industries and Clusters in 2011
      Competitive advantages                                       Competitive disadvantages
                                                                        state of cluster development                           -58
                                                                        availability of latest technologies                    -53
                                                                        local availability of research and training services   -43
                                                                        local suppliers quality                                -24
                                                                        local suppliers quantity                               -14

      Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc
      and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report.
                                                                                  Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).


             Related and supporting industries help us perceive the ability of locally avail-
      able suppliers, service providers and collaborative partners, as well as supporting
      industries, to specialize and, thus, raise competitiveness.
             Demand conditions. – There are many competitive disadvantages in this
      segment characterized by a low degree of buyer sophistication.
             Demand conditions, as the fourth component of the diamond, have not been
      devoted greater attention in economic literature. Since this component of the dia-
      mond refers to ”expensive” items, considered from the firm viewpoint, such as, for
      example, consumer protection and environmental standards, these have often been
      neglected. In essence, demand conditions are linked to the consumer needs and are
      directly related to the standards and laws on consumer protection. Therefore, one can
      increasingly find the view in modern literature on management that consumers
      should have partner status in the innovation process.

      Table 4 Relative Position of Serbia’s Demand Conditions in 2011
      Competitive advantages                                       Competitive disadvantages
                                                                        buyer sophistication                                   -66
                                                                        government procurement of advanced
                                                                         technology products                                    -22
                                                                     


      Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc
      and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report.
                                                                                  Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).


             The basic problem lies in the fact that buyer sophistication is very week and
      the fact that the government insufficiently encourages quality in their procurements.
             Company sophistication and strategy. – Company sophistication and strat-
      egy represent a special segment of microeconomic competitiveness. Many firms are
      burdened by the inherited organizational structure and (non-)market behaviour. The
      privatization process has not removed structural distortions – in some cases it has
      even deepened them – which has led to a break-up of value chains. Second, Serbia
      evidently lacks a developed SME sector.
             There are many competitive disadvantages in this segment. They range from
      companies’ strategy and operational effectiveness where, according to a number of
      subindices (technology absorption, nature of competitive adventive, degree of cus-
      tomer orientation, company spending on R&D and production process sophistica-
      tion), Serbia is at the bottom, through weaknesses in organizational practice (re-

      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index        111



flected in low level of extent of staff training and reliance of firms on professional
management).

Table 5 Relative Position of Serbia’s Company Operation and Strategy in 2011
Competitive advantages                                       Competitive disadventages
                                                                  firm technology absorption                             -66
                                                                  willingness to delegate authority                      -66
                                                                  nature of competitive advantage                        -66
                                                                  reliance on professional management                    -63
                                                                  extent of staff training                               -62
                                                                  degree of customer orientation                         -60
                                                                  company spending on R&D                                -60
                                                                  production process sophistication                      -59
                                                                  extent of marketing                                    -58
                                                                  control of international distribution                  -56
                                                                  value chain breadth                                    -43
                                                                  capacity for innovation                                -40

Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc
and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report.
                                                                           Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).


        Second, Serbia evidently lacks a developed SME sectors. There has been con-
siderable public discussion about this problem, but there is no doubt that the current
institutional framework has not been sufficiently attractive to encourage investors,
especially domestic ones, to invest in this sector. Third, companies still rely exces-
sively on competitiveness based on low prices and costs. Fourth, it has also been ob-
served that the quality of management teams is not adequate, in addition to low in-
vestments in skills and technologies at this level of development. The evident weak-
ness also lies in firms’ insufficient focus on unique products and services, coupled
with the low degree of innovativeness and corporate governance transparency.

3. Key Recommendations for Improving Competitiveness
The current economic crisis points to an even greater need to improve competitive-
ness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have succeeded in increasing their
competitiveness scores and decreasing the difference relative to advanced countries.
The countries of Central and South Eastern Europe, to which Serbia belongs, re-
corded an increase in their score by 0.3 on average, whereby the region of South
Eastern Europe has achieved poorer results. During the period 2005-2011, Serbia
recorded an increase in its score by 0.5, from 3.38 to 3.88.
       In 2011, Serbia was ranked 95th among 142 countries, with the score of 3.88.
This is decrease relative to 2005 and 2008, when Serbia was ranked 85th with the
scores of 3.38 and 3.90 respectively. However, this increase was not sufficient to
improve Serbia’s ranking, which shows that other countries were more successful.
This faces Serbia with the task to strengthen its efforts towards improving competi-
tiveness.
       According to its competitiveness, Serbia is at an impermissibly low level, es-
pecially if one bears in mind its GDPpc ppp level or SIPI. At the same time, this


                                                                                           PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
112     Nebojša Savić



      points out that there is great scope for improving competitiveness. The analysis of
      Porter’s diamond has shown that Serbia has a number of competitive disadvantages
      and almost neglectable competitive advantages.
              Those conclusions are going to be valid if we apply any other relevant meth-
      odology of competitiveness assessment.
              The first and most important recommendation for raising Serbia’s com-
      petitiveness is related to the improvement of factor conditions, including specifically
      infrastructure and institutions. Due to the weaknesses manifested in this segment,
      especially in logistic, administrative and innovation infrastructure, Serbia has found
      itself almost at the tail-end of Europe. Since the responsibility for the situation in this
      segment of competitiveness lies primarily with the government, the responsibility for
      solving this problem in the immediate future also lies primarily with it.
              As for the improvement of education and innovation infrastructure, capital
      market and financial system, the government’s responsibility must be shared with
      education, university, research and financial institutions.
              Without upgrading this segment, Serbia will not be able to overcome the pit-
      fall of its own underdevelopment.
              The second recommendation refers to the context for firm strategy and ri-
      valry in which significant weaknesses have also been observed. They are primarily
      related to the regulation of the goods and services market, including specifically anti-
      monopoly policy, market dominance and intensity of local competition, whereby the
      government role is dominant once again. As for the weaknesses in the sphere of cor-
      porate governance (the efficiency of corporate boards and impact of audit reports),
      the responsibility must also be shared with the business sector.
              We will limit ourselves to these two recommendations, although they do not
      deal with all open issues concerning competitiveness in Serbia. However, the depth
      and severity of the problems in these two segments are so pronounced that it is nec-
      essary to take urgent and resolute measures. Naturally, this does not mean that the
      relevant measures are not necessary in other segments but, at this moment, focusing
      on the mentioned two recommendations is of utmost significance.




      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index        113



References
Baldwin, Robert E. 2003. “Openness and Growth: What’s the Empirical Relationship?”
       National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 9578.
Barro, Robert. 2002. “Education as a Determinant of Economic Growth”. In Education in
       the Twenty-First Century, ed. Edvard P. Lazear, 9-24. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institute.
Carlin, Wendy, Mark Schaffer, and Paul Seabright. 2005. “A Minimum of Rivalry:
       Evidence from Transition Economies on the Importance of Competition for Innovation
       and Growth.” William Davidson Institute Working Paper 670.
Ciccone, Antonio, and Elias Papaionnou. 2007. “Red Tape and Delayed Entry.” The
       Journal of European Economic Association, 5(2-3): 444-458.
Dollar, David, and Aart Kraay. 2002. “Trade, Growth, and Poverty.” Economic Journal,
       114(493): 22-49.
Frankel, Jeffrey A., and David Roamer. 1999. “Does Trade Cause Growth?” The American
       Economic Review, 89(3): 379-399.
Krueger, Alan, and Mikael Lindahl. 2001. “Education for Growth: Why and For Whom?”
       Journal of Economic Literature, 39(4): 1101-1136.
Lewis, William W. 2004. The Power of Productivity. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago
       Press.
North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance:
       Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University
       Press.
Porter, Michael E. 2008. “Clusters and Competition: New Agenda for Companies,
       Governments, and Institutions.“ In On Competition, ed. Michael E. Porter, 213-304.
       Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Porter, Michael E. 2008a. “The Competitive Adventage of Nations.“ In On Competition, ed.
       Michael E. Porter, 171-211. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Porter, Michael E., Mercedes Delgado, Christian Ketels, and Scott Stern. 2008. “Moving
       to a New Global Competitiveness Index.“ In The Global Competitiveness Report
       2008-2009, ed. Michael E. Porter and Klaus Schwab, 43-63. Geneva: World Economic
       Forum.
Porter, Michael E., and Mariko Sakakibara. 2004. “Competition in Japan.” Journal of
       Economic Perspectives,18(1): 27-50.
Sachs, Jeffrey, and Andrew Warner. 1995. “Economic Reform and the Process of Global
       Integration.” The Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1(1): 1-118.
Sala-I-Martin, Xavier, Benat Bilbao-Osorio, Jennifer Blanke, Margareta Drzeniek
       Hanouz, and Thierry Geiger. 2011. “The Global Competitiveness Index 2011-2012:
       Settings the Foundations for Strong Productivity.” In The Global Competitiveness
       Report 2011-2012, ed. Klaus Schwab, 3-49. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
Savić, Nebojša. 2010. “Novi indeks konkurentnosti i rang Srbije.“ In Kuda ide konkurentnost
       Srbije?, ed. Nebojša Savić and Goran Pitić, 9-35. Beograd: FEFA.
Schwab, Klaus. 2009. The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010. Geneva: World
       Economic Forum.
Schwab, Klaus. 2011. The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012. Geneva: World
       Economic Forum.


                                                                          PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
114     Nebojša Savić



      Weil, David N. 2007. “Accounting for the Effect of Health on Economic Growth.” Quarterly
             Journal of Economics, 122(3): 1265-1306.
      World Bank. 2009. Doing Business 2010. Washington, DC: The World Bank.




      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index         115



Appendix

                                                          SIPI 05-08 (70)
                                                          GDPpc ppp (70)
                                                           GCI 2011 (95)



                 Macroeconomic Competitiveness                                      Microeconomic Competitiveness
                             (89)                                                              (100)


                                          Macroeconomic                         Business                     Company
                 SIPI
                                           Policy – MP                         Environment                  Sofistication
                 (89)
                                               (87)                                (87)                        (128)



                             Political
                                                          Strategy & Rivalry
                           Institutions
                                                                (112)
                              (116)


                                                                Demand
                           Rule of Law
                                                               Conditions
                              (112)
                                                                 (114)


                            Human                              Related &
                          Development                          Support.
                              (48)                               (108)


                                                          Factor Conditions
                                                                 (87)



                                             Adminsitrative                     Logistical
                                             Infrastructure                     Infrastruc.
                                                  (94)                             (115)

                                             Capital Marcet                     Innovation
                                             Infrastructure                     Infrastruc.
                                                  (106)                             (85)

                                             Communication
                                              Infrastructure
                                                   (49)



Note: Author’s recalculations, based on no weighted averages.
                                                                                      Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012).

Figure 1 Competitiveness Profile of Serbia 2011 (Preliminary)




                                                                                                     PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
116     Nebojša Savić




                                             THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


      PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Export Structure and Economic Performance
Export Structure and Economic PerformanceExport Structure and Economic Performance
Export Structure and Economic PerformanceMonica Das
 
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.FEFA Faculty
 
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise][1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]Dino, llc
 
Matching Skills to support career development
Matching Skills to support career developmentMatching Skills to support career development
Matching Skills to support career developmentinDenova
 
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growth
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growthEntrepreneurial types and_economic_growth
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growthwolanita
 
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1Robbert Bosscher
 
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...Alexander Decker
 
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...Palkansaajien tutkimuslaitos
 
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managi
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managiHbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managi
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managisimba35
 
4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness
4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness
4.2.5 Global-CompetitivenessIGilmore
 
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance evidence from a
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance  evidence from aDynamic capabilities link with firm performance  evidence from a
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance evidence from aNghiên Cứu Định Lượng
 

Tendances (13)

Export Structure and Economic Performance
Export Structure and Economic PerformanceExport Structure and Economic Performance
Export Structure and Economic Performance
 
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, CorD, 1. 2. 2015.
 
FACTORS AFFECTING ODA PROJECT PERFORMANCE
FACTORS AFFECTING ODA PROJECT PERFORMANCEFACTORS AFFECTING ODA PROJECT PERFORMANCE
FACTORS AFFECTING ODA PROJECT PERFORMANCE
 
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise][1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]
[1999][r&d][eee extended engineeringenterprise]
 
Matching Skills to support career development
Matching Skills to support career developmentMatching Skills to support career development
Matching Skills to support career development
 
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growth
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growthEntrepreneurial types and_economic_growth
Entrepreneurial types and_economic_growth
 
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1
Capstone - Final Version - Robbert Bosscher - i548367-1
 
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...
The relationship between amman stock exchange (ase) market and real gross dom...
 
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...
Characteristics and labour market performance of the new member state immigra...
 
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managi
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managiHbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managi
Hbr.org september 2014 reprint r1409 cspotlight on managi
 
4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness
4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness
4.2.5 Global-Competitiveness
 
F0322029043
F0322029043F0322029043
F0322029043
 
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance evidence from a
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance  evidence from aDynamic capabilities link with firm performance  evidence from a
Dynamic capabilities link with firm performance evidence from a
 

En vedette

Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld
 Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld
Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from SignworldKen Kindt Signworld
 
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNam
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNamLongterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNam
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNamquaivat3dau1
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.FEFA Faculty
 
Blended learning
Blended learningBlended learning
Blended learningbobkeith
 
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFA
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFAProf. dr Goran Pitić, FEFA
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFAFEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.FEFA Faculty
 
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10FEFA Faculty
 

En vedette (10)

Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld
 Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld
Ken Kindt Signworld - Exterior and Interior Signs from Signworld
 
Stream Engines in Howarth 2014
Stream Engines in Howarth 2014Stream Engines in Howarth 2014
Stream Engines in Howarth 2014
 
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNam
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNamLongterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNam
Longterm Solution for Digital Marketing in VietNam
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Kopaonik biznis forum, Tanjug, 14.03.2013.
 
Blended learning
Blended learningBlended learning
Blended learning
 
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFA
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFAProf. dr Goran Pitić, FEFA
Prof. dr Goran Pitić, FEFA
 
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Ilustrovana politika, maj 2012.
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Blic, 26. 5. 2014.
 
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10
Evropska misao u Srbiji 2009/10
 
Pr mar 2010 (swv50)
Pr mar 2010 (swv50)Pr mar 2010 (swv50)
Pr mar 2010 (swv50)
 

Similaire à Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Panoeconomicus, 2012-1

Nigeria global competitiveness index macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)
Nigeria global competitiveness index   macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)Nigeria global competitiveness index   macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)
Nigeria global competitiveness index macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)statisense
 
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...Renee Franco
 
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in NigeriaTax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeriaiosrjce
 
competitiveness outlook 2016
competitiveness outlook 2016competitiveness outlook 2016
competitiveness outlook 2016Alan Paic
 
Nigeria global competitive index 2014
Nigeria global competitive index 2014Nigeria global competitive index 2014
Nigeria global competitive index 2014statisense
 
Innovation And Change For Business Sustainability
Innovation And Change For Business SustainabilityInnovation And Change For Business Sustainability
Innovation And Change For Business SustainabilityNik Hasyudeen
 
voucher system
voucher systemvoucher system
voucher systemLiyaSmart
 
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...iosrjce
 
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesia
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in IndonesiaAnalysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesia
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesiaiosrjce
 
Assessment of Local Governance and Development Performance in Indonesia
   Assessment of Local Governance and Development  Performance in Indonesia   Assessment of Local Governance and Development  Performance in Indonesia
Assessment of Local Governance and Development Performance in IndonesiaDr. Astia Dendi
 
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...Istituto nazionale di statistica
 
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...Karina Thomas
 
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experience
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experienceStock market and economic growth the nigerian experience
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experienceAlexander Decker
 
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)Inspiring Benefits
 
2014 World Talent Report
2014 World Talent Report 2014 World Talent Report
2014 World Talent Report Colin McKillop
 
Economics of International Competitiveness
Economics of International CompetitivenessEconomics of International Competitiveness
Economics of International Competitivenesstutor2u
 
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...Alexander Decker
 

Similaire à Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Panoeconomicus, 2012-1 (20)

Arab World Competitiveness Report 2007
Arab World Competitiveness Report 2007Arab World Competitiveness Report 2007
Arab World Competitiveness Report 2007
 
Nigeria global competitiveness index macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)
Nigeria global competitiveness index   macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)Nigeria global competitiveness index   macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)
Nigeria global competitiveness index macroeconomic environment (2006 - 2012)
 
Portugal economic-survey-main-findings
Portugal economic-survey-main-findingsPortugal economic-survey-main-findings
Portugal economic-survey-main-findings
 
Capital Accumulation and Labour Productivity Growth in Nigeria
Capital Accumulation and Labour Productivity Growth in NigeriaCapital Accumulation and Labour Productivity Growth in Nigeria
Capital Accumulation and Labour Productivity Growth in Nigeria
 
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...
The Causality Of Foreign Direct Investment And Economic...
 
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in NigeriaTax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria
Tax Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria
 
competitiveness outlook 2016
competitiveness outlook 2016competitiveness outlook 2016
competitiveness outlook 2016
 
Nigeria global competitive index 2014
Nigeria global competitive index 2014Nigeria global competitive index 2014
Nigeria global competitive index 2014
 
Innovation And Change For Business Sustainability
Innovation And Change For Business SustainabilityInnovation And Change For Business Sustainability
Innovation And Change For Business Sustainability
 
voucher system
voucher systemvoucher system
voucher system
 
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...
TheCompetitiveness And Economic Performance OfRegency/City In East Java Indon...
 
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesia
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in IndonesiaAnalysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesia
Analysis Influence Exchange Rates and Exports on Economic Growth in Indonesia
 
Assessment of Local Governance and Development Performance in Indonesia
   Assessment of Local Governance and Development  Performance in Indonesia   Assessment of Local Governance and Development  Performance in Indonesia
Assessment of Local Governance and Development Performance in Indonesia
 
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...
P. Annoni: The European Commission measures the level of regional competitive...
 
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...
Relationship Between Vietnamese Stock Price Relative On...
 
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experience
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experienceStock market and economic growth the nigerian experience
Stock market and economic growth the nigerian experience
 
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)
Aon Hewitt 6th European HR Barometer Executive Summary (2011)
 
2014 World Talent Report
2014 World Talent Report 2014 World Talent Report
2014 World Talent Report
 
Economics of International Competitiveness
Economics of International CompetitivenessEconomics of International Competitiveness
Economics of International Competitiveness
 
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...
Analysis of the national strategy implementation on kenya’s global competitiv...
 

Plus de FEFA Faculty

Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4FEFA Faculty
 
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019FEFA Faculty
 
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019FEFA Faculty
 
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019FEFA Faculty
 
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...FEFA Faculty
 
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFA
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFADoc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFA
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAFEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet Srbije
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet SrbijeProf. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet Srbije
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet SrbijeFEFA Faculty
 
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.FEFA Faculty
 
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.FEFA Faculty
 
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017FEFA Faculty
 

Plus de FEFA Faculty (20)

Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019, br. 4
 
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019
Dr Tanja Kuzman, Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, april 2019
 
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019
Zoja Kukić, FEFA, Digital Business Review, Nedeljnik, mart 2019
 
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019
Bojan Mirković, master student DT FEFA, Digital Business Review, februar 2019
 
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...
Ema Marinković, doc.dr Slađana Starčević, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFAarcevic_...
 
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFA
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFADoc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFA
Doc. dr Slađana Starcević, Ema Marinković, Aleksandra Majdarević, FEFA
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, FEFA, Davos 2019
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, rukovodilac doktorskih studija FEFA , Dan uživo, ...
 
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet Srbije
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet SrbijeProf. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet Srbije
Prof. dr Branka Drašković, Kvartalni bilten, Nacionalni naftni komitet Srbije
 
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....
28. ekonomsko-politički forum Strane investicije u Srbiji i Nemačkoj, 18. 10....
 
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.
Prof. dr Ana Trbović, Intellectsoft, 25. maj. 2018.
 
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.
FEFA Kreativna produkcija, Blic, 25. 5.2018.
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, TV N1, 3. 6. 2018.
 
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.
Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Danas, 8. 3. 2018.
 
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.
Branislav Vujović gost-predavač na FEFA,. Nedeljnik, 28. 2. 2018.
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Danas, 12. 2. 2018.
 
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.
Prof. dr Miloljub Albijanić, Danas, 1. 2. 2018.
 
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.
Prof. dr Milan Nedeljković, Info BIZ, TV N1, 1. februar 2018.
 
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.
Prof. dr Mihailo Crnobrnja, Blic, 24. 11. 2017.
 
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017
Darko Mandić, Mondo, 15. 11. 2017
 

Dernier

2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx
2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx
2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptxSandy Millin
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepobaje godwin sunday
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.raviapr7
 
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptx
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptxPatterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptx
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptxMYDA ANGELICA SUAN
 
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsThe Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsEugene Lysak
 
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a Paragraph
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a ParagraphPresentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a Paragraph
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a ParagraphNetziValdelomar1
 
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptx
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptxUltra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptx
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptxDr. Asif Anas
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...raviapr7
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17Celine George
 
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE
 
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfMaximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfTechSoup
 
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17Celine George
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxraviapr7
 
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationMJDuyan
 
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptx
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptxCapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptx
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptxCapitolTechU
 

Dernier (20)

2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx
2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx
2024.03.23 What do successful readers do - Sandy Millin for PARK.pptx
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and step
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
 
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptx
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptxPatterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptx
Patterns of Written Texts Across Disciplines.pptx
 
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsThe Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
 
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a Paragraph
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a ParagraphPresentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a Paragraph
Presentation on the Basics of Writing. Writing a Paragraph
 
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptx
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptxUltra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptx
Ultra structure and life cycle of Plasmodium.pptx
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
 
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
How to Add Existing Field in One2Many Tree View in Odoo 17
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
 
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
 
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfMaximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
 
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
 
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...
CHUYÊN ĐỀ DẠY THÊM TIẾNG ANH LỚP 11 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 - HK...
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
 
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptx
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptxCapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptx
CapTechU Doctoral Presentation -March 2024 slides.pptx
 
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdfPersonal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
 

Prof. dr Nebojša Savić, Panoeconomicus, 2012-1

  • 1. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115 UDC 339.137.2 (497.11) Received: 17 April 2010; Accepted: 16 March 2011. DOI: 10.2298/PAN1201105S Professional paper Nebojša Savić Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index Faculty of Economics, Finance and Administration – FEFA, Serbia  nsavic@fefa.edu.rs Summary: The current economic crisis points out to an even greater need to improve competitiveness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have succeeded in increasing their competitiveness scores and decreasing the dif- ference relative to advanced countries. The countries of Central and South Eastern Europe, to which Serbia belongs, have recorded an increase in their score by 0.3 on average, whereby the region of South Eastern Europe has achieved poorer results. During the period 2005-2011, Serbia recorded an increase in its score by 0.5, from 3.38 to 3.88. In 2011, Serbia was ranked 95th among 142 countries, with the score of 3.88. This is a decline relative to 2008 and 2005, when Serbia was ranked 85th with the scores of 3.38 and 3.90 re- spectively. However, this increase was not sufficient to improve Serbia’s rank- ing, which shows that other countries were more successful. This faces Serbia This paper is part of a research project with the task to strengthen its efforts towards improving competitiveness. "Improving Serbia’s competitiveness in the process of accessing the European Union”, number 47028, for the period Key words: Competitiveness, Porter’s diamond, Productivity, Serbia. 2010/2014, which is supported by Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia. JEL: F23, O57. The current economic crisis points to an even greater need to improve competitive- ness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have succeded in increasing their competitiveness scores and decreasing the difference relative to advanced countries (Xavier Sala-I-Martin et al. 2011). The countries of Central and South Eastern Europe, to which Serbia belongs, have recorded an increase in their score by 0.3 on average, whereby the region of South Eastern Europe has achieved poorer results. During the period 2005-2011, Serbia recorded an increase in its score by 0.5, from 3.38 to 3.88. The aim of this paper is to assess Serbia’s competitiveness position in 2011 and define recommendations for improving it. 1. The Methodology of Competitiveness Assessment The significance of improving national competitiveness is a widely accepted. In or- der to define this concept in an adequate way, it is necessary to proceed from the im- provement of the standard of living of all citizens as the foundation of national pros- perity. Productivity depends on the value of goods and services expressed in the world prices achieved by an economy and on the efficiency of that production. Rais- ing the productivity level enables a country to follow the path based on high wages, attractive returns on capital and a strong currency, accompanied by a high standard of
  • 2. 106 Nebojša Savić living. The standard of living, that is prosperity, is determined by an economy's pro- ductivity level, which is expressed by the value of goods and services produced per unit of human capital, physical capital and natural resources used in their production (Michael Porter et al. 2008). The market value is created only by companies, which are limited only by the intensity of their innovation and dynamism. Although the government plays a sig- nificant role in the provision of conditions that enable value creation, it cannot create value. Raising competitiveness is the process of improving the business environment, which enables a rise in domestic investment, foreign and domestic investment in- flows, exports, imports and the like. Each of these factors depends on a country's level of competitiveness. Domestic and foreign investors will not invest their capital in a country unless it offers an attractive value proposition, while its exports will be- gin to increase only when its products obtain necessary quality, based on efficient production. Direct government subsidies for a rise in exports, investments and the number of innovations contribute only modestly to a rise in productivity. In 2008, Porter and his associates made synthetic competitiveness index - New Global Competitiveness Index (NGCI) (Porter et al. 2008). The NGCI is concen- trated on the determinants of an economy's sustainable level of productivity, while the level of competitiveness is the ultimate agent of national prosperity. The NGCI is calculated on the basis of public data and a unique opinion survey, which have also been used in the GCR so far. Competitiveness is what determines the productivity with which endowments are used to create goods and services (Porter et al. 2008, p. 45). The aim of the NGCI is to identify the sources of productivity. Therefore, according to the NGCI, a coun- try’s level of competitiveness is determined by the following three factors (Porter et al. 2008, pp. 45-48): (i) endowments; (ii) macroeconomic competitiveness; and (iii) microeconomic competitiveness. In the theory of competitiveness endowments include available natural re- sources, a country’s geographical location and the size of the domestic market and populations. Whether these resources will be put in the service of a country’s pros- perity depends primarily on the policies being implemented (in this respect, the ex- periences of countries are widely varied). In essence, this determinant of competitiveness is related to the level of pro- ductivity with which se use natural resources, available human capital and the like. The second determinant of competitiveness is macroeconomic competitive- ness which consists of the following two components: (i) macroeconomic policies (MP); and (ii) social infrastructure and political institutions (SIPI). The factors of macroeconomic competitiveness have an indirect impact on the productivity level of firms due to which they are very important but not sufficient for raising productivity. The second factor of macroeconomic competitiveness is the SIPI, which is primarily linked to institutions (Douglass C. North 1990). The three most important compo- nents of the SIPI are: available basic human capital, political institutions and the rule of law. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 3. Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index 107 The general context for improving the current level of competitiveness is cre- ated on this second layer of competitiveness. The third and the most important determinant is microeconomic competitive- ness. It is the most important due to the fact that is only one dimension of competi- tiveness which has a direct impact on a company’s productivity level. The main components of microeconomic competitiveness are company sophistication and strategy (COS), the quality of the national business environment (NBE) and the state of cluster development (SCD), which is closely related to agglomeration economics. Value is created only on this layer of competitiveness due to which it has a di- rect impact on the level of productivity. In view of the fact that value is created only by firms, it is crucial that business environment quality, which is the most important component of this determinant of competitiveness, is at a higher level. 2. An Assessment of Serbia’s Competitiveness Based on the NGCI In continuation we will analyze Serbia’s competitiveness position based on the GCR data for 2011-2011. According to the level of GDPpc adjusted by purchasing power parity Serbia holds 70th place in the world, which should also correspond to its com- petitiveness level. We have analyzed all four components of Porter’s diamond using more than 100 subindices. The first analysis of Serbian competitiveness based on this new methodology was made a year ago (Nebojša Savić 2010). Our assessment, based on extensive calculation, has shown that in the period 2005-2008 Serbia’s SIPI was 70. In other words Serbia falls into the group of the first seventy countries in the world. We have obtained such a rank using a somewhat shorter series than the one used by Porter and associates (it covered the period 2002- 2008). We have defined as competitive disadvantages or advantages all ranks that de- viate up to 10 places upward or downward from the SIPI rank (according to which Serbia ranked 70th). All ranks from 1st to 59th (compared to the SIPI) are treated as competitive advantages, while all ranks from 81st to 142nd (compared to SIPI) as competitive disadvantages. We begin an empirical analysis with the quality assessment of the business environment. The superior method for this assessment is the implementation of Por- ter’s diamond framework, because it enables a comprehensive view of productivity through four elements of the national business environment – factor conditions, de- mand conditions, the context for firm strategy and rivalry, and related and supported industries (Porter 2008a, pp. 171-211). Factor conditions. – Globalization and a rise in the volume of trade have in- creased the demand for transport and communication infrastructure, capital market infrastructure and quality education. The development level of physical infrastruc- ture, available capital and quality of education, especially higher education embodied in human resources (Alan B. Krueger and Michael Lindahl 2001; Robert Barro 2002), have a very favourable effect on prosperity. Administrative infrastructure, that PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 4. 108 Nebojša Savić is, bureaucratic red tape, is also of great significance. In recent times, this component has been regarded as being significant for competitiveness, primarily thanks to the analyses conducted by the World Bank (Antonio Ciccone and Elias Papaionnou 2007; World Bank 2009). Serbia has significant competitive advantages in the part of communication in- frastructure, thanks to the number of telephone lines and computers, and in the part of innovation infrastructure, thanks to the tertiary enrollment and the quality of mathematics and scientific education. Also, there is an advantage in getting credit on capital market infrastructure. Table 1 Relative Position of Serbia’s Factor Conditions in 2011 Competitive advantages Competitive disadventages Capital Market Infrastructure Logistical Infrastructure  doing business-getting credit +55  quality of port infrastructure -63  quality of air transport -62 Communication Infrastructure  quality of roads -61  telephone lines +44  quality of rail road infrastructure -32  mobile telephone subscribers +42 Capital Market Infrastructure Innovation Infrastructure  protection of minority shareholders’ interests -70  tertiary enrollment +20  venture capital availability -51  quality of math & science education +12  regulation of security exchange -51  quality of scientific research institutions +9  soundness of banks -46  financial market sophistication -33 Administrative Infrastructure  time required to start business +19 Administrative Infrastructure  paying taxes -68  burden of government regulation -23  burden of custom procedures -23 Innovation Infrastructure  brain drain -69  quality of management schools -44  quality of educational system -41 Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). However, competitive disadvantages in this component are very pronounced and show that the basic weaknesses of Serbia’s competitiveness are hidden just in this segment of business environment. The unsustainably low level of Serbia’s com- petitiveness due to competitive disadvantages in logistical infrastructure, capital market infrastructure, administrative infrastructure and innovation infrastructure have substantively ranked Serbia very low. Factor conditions are the crucial component of the diamond that reduces Serbia’s level of competitiveness. Context for strategy and rivalry. – The context for firm strategy and rivalry has a significant impact on the way in which companies use factor conditions. The high level of competition on the local market is important for achieving high per- formance (Porter and Mariko Sakakibara 2004; William W. Lewis 2004; Wendy Carlin, Mark Schaffer, and Paul Seabright 2005). Competition determines firms’ en- PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 5. Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index 109 try and exit. Since competition is so significant, the government’s influence on pro- ductivity is of great significance, especially through tax incentives, competition law, etc. Numerous studies have confirmed that there is a close link between openness and growth (Jefrrey Sachs and Andrew Warner 1995; Jeffrey A. Frankel and David Roamer 1999; David Dollar and Aart Kraay 2002; Robert Baldwin 2003). Competitive advantages in the strategy and rivalry context are connected with openness and vigorous local competition and with rules and incentives which en- courage investment and productivity. In this respect Serbia has many competitive disadvantages due to the very seriously endangered market character of the Serbian economy. According to the local competition the following major weaknesses have been manifested: market dominance, efficiency of anti-trust policy and intensity of local competition. Rules and incentives also generate weaknesses in the field of FDI inflow, taxa- tion, prevalence of foreign ownership and corporate governance. The manifested weaknesses point to the need for profound changes within structural adjustment, including both the role of government and the strengthening of rivalry on the domestic market, so that the Serbian economy can obtain all character- istics of a market economy. Table 2 Relative Position of Serbia’s Context for Strategy and Rivalry in 2011 Competitive advantages Competitive disadvantages  strength of investor protection +10  extent of market dominance -69  extent of anti-trust policy -67  local competition -66  efficiency of corporate boards -66  cooperation in labor-employer relation -66  impact of rules on FDI -55  extent and effect of taxation -48  prevalence of foreign ownership -46  strength of auditing and reporting standards -44  FDI and technology transfer -40  pay and productivity -33 Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). Related and supporting industries. – In the segment of related and support- ing industries Serbia has no competitive advantage. The dominant characteristic of this segment is the low level of cluster development and availability of latest tech- nologies. Weaknesses are also reflected in the local availability of research and train- ing services and low level quality and quantity of local suppliers. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 6. 110 Nebojša Savić Table 3 Relative Position of Serbia’s Supporting and Related Industries and Clusters in 2011 Competitive advantages Competitive disadvantages  state of cluster development -58  availability of latest technologies -53  local availability of research and training services -43  local suppliers quality -24  local suppliers quantity -14 Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). Related and supporting industries help us perceive the ability of locally avail- able suppliers, service providers and collaborative partners, as well as supporting industries, to specialize and, thus, raise competitiveness. Demand conditions. – There are many competitive disadvantages in this segment characterized by a low degree of buyer sophistication. Demand conditions, as the fourth component of the diamond, have not been devoted greater attention in economic literature. Since this component of the dia- mond refers to ”expensive” items, considered from the firm viewpoint, such as, for example, consumer protection and environmental standards, these have often been neglected. In essence, demand conditions are linked to the consumer needs and are directly related to the standards and laws on consumer protection. Therefore, one can increasingly find the view in modern literature on management that consumers should have partner status in the innovation process. Table 4 Relative Position of Serbia’s Demand Conditions in 2011 Competitive advantages Competitive disadvantages  buyer sophistication -66  government procurement of advanced technology products -22  Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). The basic problem lies in the fact that buyer sophistication is very week and the fact that the government insufficiently encourages quality in their procurements. Company sophistication and strategy. – Company sophistication and strat- egy represent a special segment of microeconomic competitiveness. Many firms are burdened by the inherited organizational structure and (non-)market behaviour. The privatization process has not removed structural distortions – in some cases it has even deepened them – which has led to a break-up of value chains. Second, Serbia evidently lacks a developed SME sector. There are many competitive disadvantages in this segment. They range from companies’ strategy and operational effectiveness where, according to a number of subindices (technology absorption, nature of competitive adventive, degree of cus- tomer orientation, company spending on R&D and production process sophistica- tion), Serbia is at the bottom, through weaknesses in organizational practice (re- PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 7. Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index 111 flected in low level of extent of staff training and reliance of firms on professional management). Table 5 Relative Position of Serbia’s Company Operation and Strategy in 2011 Competitive advantages Competitive disadventages  firm technology absorption -66  willingness to delegate authority -66  nature of competitive advantage -66  reliance on professional management -63  extent of staff training -62  degree of customer orientation -60  company spending on R&D -60  production process sophistication -59  extent of marketing -58  control of international distribution -56  value chain breadth -43  capacity for innovation -40 Note: Author’s recalculations (SIPI=70). Rank versus 142 countries; overall, Serbia ranks 70th in 2011 PPP adjusted GDPpc and 95th in Global Competitiveness Report. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). Second, Serbia evidently lacks a developed SME sectors. There has been con- siderable public discussion about this problem, but there is no doubt that the current institutional framework has not been sufficiently attractive to encourage investors, especially domestic ones, to invest in this sector. Third, companies still rely exces- sively on competitiveness based on low prices and costs. Fourth, it has also been ob- served that the quality of management teams is not adequate, in addition to low in- vestments in skills and technologies at this level of development. The evident weak- ness also lies in firms’ insufficient focus on unique products and services, coupled with the low degree of innovativeness and corporate governance transparency. 3. Key Recommendations for Improving Competitiveness The current economic crisis points to an even greater need to improve competitive- ness. Since 2005, numerous developing countries have succeeded in increasing their competitiveness scores and decreasing the difference relative to advanced countries. The countries of Central and South Eastern Europe, to which Serbia belongs, re- corded an increase in their score by 0.3 on average, whereby the region of South Eastern Europe has achieved poorer results. During the period 2005-2011, Serbia recorded an increase in its score by 0.5, from 3.38 to 3.88. In 2011, Serbia was ranked 95th among 142 countries, with the score of 3.88. This is decrease relative to 2005 and 2008, when Serbia was ranked 85th with the scores of 3.38 and 3.90 respectively. However, this increase was not sufficient to improve Serbia’s ranking, which shows that other countries were more successful. This faces Serbia with the task to strengthen its efforts towards improving competi- tiveness. According to its competitiveness, Serbia is at an impermissibly low level, es- pecially if one bears in mind its GDPpc ppp level or SIPI. At the same time, this PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 8. 112 Nebojša Savić points out that there is great scope for improving competitiveness. The analysis of Porter’s diamond has shown that Serbia has a number of competitive disadvantages and almost neglectable competitive advantages. Those conclusions are going to be valid if we apply any other relevant meth- odology of competitiveness assessment. The first and most important recommendation for raising Serbia’s com- petitiveness is related to the improvement of factor conditions, including specifically infrastructure and institutions. Due to the weaknesses manifested in this segment, especially in logistic, administrative and innovation infrastructure, Serbia has found itself almost at the tail-end of Europe. Since the responsibility for the situation in this segment of competitiveness lies primarily with the government, the responsibility for solving this problem in the immediate future also lies primarily with it. As for the improvement of education and innovation infrastructure, capital market and financial system, the government’s responsibility must be shared with education, university, research and financial institutions. Without upgrading this segment, Serbia will not be able to overcome the pit- fall of its own underdevelopment. The second recommendation refers to the context for firm strategy and ri- valry in which significant weaknesses have also been observed. They are primarily related to the regulation of the goods and services market, including specifically anti- monopoly policy, market dominance and intensity of local competition, whereby the government role is dominant once again. As for the weaknesses in the sphere of cor- porate governance (the efficiency of corporate boards and impact of audit reports), the responsibility must also be shared with the business sector. We will limit ourselves to these two recommendations, although they do not deal with all open issues concerning competitiveness in Serbia. However, the depth and severity of the problems in these two segments are so pronounced that it is nec- essary to take urgent and resolute measures. Naturally, this does not mean that the relevant measures are not necessary in other segments but, at this moment, focusing on the mentioned two recommendations is of utmost significance. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 9. Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index 113 References Baldwin, Robert E. 2003. “Openness and Growth: What’s the Empirical Relationship?” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 9578. Barro, Robert. 2002. “Education as a Determinant of Economic Growth”. In Education in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Edvard P. Lazear, 9-24. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institute. Carlin, Wendy, Mark Schaffer, and Paul Seabright. 2005. “A Minimum of Rivalry: Evidence from Transition Economies on the Importance of Competition for Innovation and Growth.” William Davidson Institute Working Paper 670. Ciccone, Antonio, and Elias Papaionnou. 2007. “Red Tape and Delayed Entry.” The Journal of European Economic Association, 5(2-3): 444-458. Dollar, David, and Aart Kraay. 2002. “Trade, Growth, and Poverty.” Economic Journal, 114(493): 22-49. Frankel, Jeffrey A., and David Roamer. 1999. “Does Trade Cause Growth?” The American Economic Review, 89(3): 379-399. Krueger, Alan, and Mikael Lindahl. 2001. “Education for Growth: Why and For Whom?” Journal of Economic Literature, 39(4): 1101-1136. Lewis, William W. 2004. The Power of Productivity. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press. North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Porter, Michael E. 2008. “Clusters and Competition: New Agenda for Companies, Governments, and Institutions.“ In On Competition, ed. Michael E. Porter, 213-304. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Porter, Michael E. 2008a. “The Competitive Adventage of Nations.“ In On Competition, ed. Michael E. Porter, 171-211. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Porter, Michael E., Mercedes Delgado, Christian Ketels, and Scott Stern. 2008. “Moving to a New Global Competitiveness Index.“ In The Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009, ed. Michael E. Porter and Klaus Schwab, 43-63. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Porter, Michael E., and Mariko Sakakibara. 2004. “Competition in Japan.” Journal of Economic Perspectives,18(1): 27-50. Sachs, Jeffrey, and Andrew Warner. 1995. “Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration.” The Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1(1): 1-118. Sala-I-Martin, Xavier, Benat Bilbao-Osorio, Jennifer Blanke, Margareta Drzeniek Hanouz, and Thierry Geiger. 2011. “The Global Competitiveness Index 2011-2012: Settings the Foundations for Strong Productivity.” In The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012, ed. Klaus Schwab, 3-49. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Savić, Nebojša. 2010. “Novi indeks konkurentnosti i rang Srbije.“ In Kuda ide konkurentnost Srbije?, ed. Nebojša Savić and Goran Pitić, 9-35. Beograd: FEFA. Schwab, Klaus. 2009. The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Schwab, Klaus. 2011. The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012. Geneva: World Economic Forum. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 10. 114 Nebojša Savić Weil, David N. 2007. “Accounting for the Effect of Health on Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3): 1265-1306. World Bank. 2009. Doing Business 2010. Washington, DC: The World Bank. PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 11. Comparative Analysis Based on New Competitiveness Index 115 Appendix SIPI 05-08 (70) GDPpc ppp (70) GCI 2011 (95) Macroeconomic Competitiveness Microeconomic Competitiveness (89) (100) Macroeconomic Business Company SIPI Policy – MP Environment Sofistication (89) (87) (87) (128) Political Strategy & Rivalry Institutions (112) (116) Demand Rule of Law Conditions (112) (114) Human Related & Development Support. (48) (108) Factor Conditions (87) Adminsitrative Logistical Infrastructure Infrastruc. (94) (115) Capital Marcet Innovation Infrastructure Infrastruc. (106) (85) Communication Infrastructure (49) Note: Author’s recalculations, based on no weighted averages. Source: Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012). Figure 1 Competitiveness Profile of Serbia 2011 (Preliminary) PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115
  • 12. 116 Nebojša Savić THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PANOECONOMICUS, 2012, 1, pp. 105-115