Turkey and the Lisbon process. A short research note on the position of Turkey on a new “Lisbon Strategy Index” (LSI)
|
 |
|
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|
|
JOURNAL:
|
Insight Turkey,
8(1),
7 -
18.
|
|
|
|
YEAR:
|
2006
|
|
PUB TYPE:
|
Journal Article
|
|
SUBJECT(S):
|
Political science, European Union studies
|
|
DISCIPLINE:
|
Political Science
|
|
HTTP:
|
http://www.insightturkey.com/
|
|
LANGUAGE:
|
English
|
|
PUB ID:
|
103-426-108
(Last edited on
2006/05/29 02:09:52 GMT-6)
|
|
SPONSOR(S):
|
|
|
ABSTRACT:
As it is well-known, the EU Heads of States and Governments agreed in Lisbon in March 2000 to make the EU "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-driven economy by 2010". Although some progress was made on innovating Europe's economy, there is growing concern that the reform process is not going fast enough and that the ambitious targets will not be reached. This joint Swedish-Austrian study now addresses the measurement of two composite Lisbon strategy indices (“one-glance, one click” indicators) that quantify the level and patterns of Lisbon process fulfillment in Europe. If we want to reduce the complexity of the 14 main Lisbon indicators, the usual ranking procedures, still popular among government bureaucracies in the EU (“scoreboards”, i.e. simply adding together ranks on various indicators), are by far insufficient. One new index, a new “Lisbon strategy index (LSI)”, is based on a method that corresponds to the calculation of the famous UNDP “Human Development Index”, and is composed, like the UNDP HDI, on various sub-components. Sweden, Norway and USA are ranked as highest on that new “UNDP” type Lisbon-Index. Bulgaria, Turkey and Malta are the lowest ranked countries on the new Index. The article is at least partially optimistic about Turkey’s performance in the Lisbon process. Again it is shown that the United States outperform most EU-member states. Our investigations also allow us to show the dynamic changes taking place, as the countries of the Union struggle to achieve the Lisbon goals. The necessity of a real reform agenda in Germany and in several old and new member and candidate countries again emerges from our analysis. The detailed analysis of the dynamic and factor analytical results shows that the Lisbon progress in Turkey has been at least comparable to that of several EU-member countries. Thus “Lisbon” cannot be used to bloc the Turkish EU-membership ambitions.
Key Words: Economic Development, Index Numbers, Economic Integration, Comparative Country Studies, Lisbon Agenda
JEL Classification Numbers: O10, C43, F15, O57.
|
|
|
|
STATISTICS
|
|
Click on # to view
|
|
Citations
|
|
0
|
|
References
|
|
0
|
|
Comments
|
|
0
|
|
Quality
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
Interest
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
View(er)s
|
|
2/687
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Prev |
Next |
|