Evaluation of the financial and economic development of the European Union member states on basis of multiple indicators changed to multiple objectives

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorLi, Changxing
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-06
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-17T08:19:20Z
dc.date.available2018-12-17T08:19:20Z
dc.description.abstractInnovation has received more and more attention in the European Union since adoption of the Lisbon Strategy in 2000. In 2010 the European Commission 2010; European Council adopted a new strategy, Europe 2020, which stressed again the importance of innovations. Therefore it is important to evaluate the current level of the European Union Member States’ technological and economic development as well as its innovations impact on it. Innovation impact on economic development was analyzed by correlating various composite indices with GDP per capita indicator. The author proposes a conceptual model for economic development evaluation according to a world-system approach. The level of economic development can thus be identified by a system of indicators rather than single one (e. g. GDP per capita). A new conceptual model for the European Union Member States’ technological and economic development according to the world-system approach is proposed in this article. The world-system approach describes structure, relations and dynamics of international systems encompassing separate entities such as states. Three main roles of the states can be defined: core, semi-periphery and periphery. Core states are the most technologically and economically developed ones and accumulate capital from peripheral states. The model consists of system of indicators, application of multi-criteria evaluation methods and summarized ranking. The system of indicators covers indicators describing technological, economic and social situation in the European Union treated as objectives. MULTIMOORA and TOPSIS methods were used together in order to improve robustness of the analysis. Summarized ranks resemble level of technological and economic development of certain European Union Member States and thus their roles in the European world-system. There were three groups of Member States defined, representing core, semi-periphery and periphery of the European world-system. These ranks can be used in further studies instead of single indicators representing economic development (e.g. GDP per capita). In addition, some theoretical issues regarding multi-criteria evaluation methods are discussed in the paper.en
dc.formattext
dc.format.extent14 strancs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2018-4-002
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn1212-3609
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/124743
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.ispartofAhmed, R. R., Vveinhardt, J., & Streimikiene, D. (2018). The direct and indirect impact of pharmaceutical industry in economic expansion and job creation: evidence from bootstrapping and normal theory methods. Amfiteatru Economic, 20(48), 454-469. https://dx.doi.org/10.24818/EA/2018/48/454.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBaležentis, T., Štreimikienė, D., Melnikienė, R., & Yu, Z. (2017). Non-parametric analysis of yield risk in Lithuanian crop farming. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(3), 521-536. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2017.1322633.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBelser, P., de Cock, M., & Mehran, F. (2005). ILO Minimum Estimate of Forced Labour in the World. Geneva: International Labour Office.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBosma, N., & Levie, J. (2010). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2009 Executive Report. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from https://www.gemconsortium.org/report.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. (2002). The multiplicative representation for multiple objectives optimization with an application for arms procurement. Naval Research Logistics, 49(4), 327-340. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nav.10014.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. (2004). Optimization Methods for a Stakeholder Society, a Revolution in Economic Thinking by Multi-Objective Optimization. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. (2007). What is meant by normalization in decision making? International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 8(5/6), 445-460. https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2007.013411.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. M., & Ginevičius, R. (2009). Robustness in Regional Development Studies. The Case of Lithuania. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 10(2), 121-140. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1611-1699.2009.10.121-140.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. M., & Ginevičius, R. (2010). The economy of the Belgian regions tested with MULTIMOORA. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 173-209. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.09.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2006). The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy. Control and Cybernetics, 35(2), 445-469.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 5-24. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.01.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K. M., Ginevičius, R., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antuchevičienė, J. (2007). The European Union in a transition economy. Transformations in Business & Economics, 6(2), 21-37.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrauers, W. K., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2009). Robustness of the multi-objective MOORA method with a test for the facilities sector. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 15(2), 352-375. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.352-375.cs
dc.relation.ispartofChase-Dunn, C. K. (1979). Comparative Research on World-System Characteristics. International Studies Quarterly, 23(4), 601-623. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2600333.cs
dc.relation.ispartofChen, J., Wang, J., Baležentis, T., Zagurskaitė, F., Streimikiene, D., & Makutėnienė, D. (2018). Multicriteria Approach towards the Sustainable Selection of a Teahouse Location with Sensitivity Analysis. Sustainability, 10(8), 2926. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082926.cs
dc.relation.ispartofChurchman, C. W., Ackoff, R. L., & Arnoff, E. L. (1957). Introduction to Operations Research. New York: Wiley.cs
dc.relation.ispartofDe Arriba Bueno, R. (2010). Assessing Economic Transition in Eastern Europe after Twenty Years. Transformations in Business & Economics, 9(2), 42-63.cs
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Commission. (2010). Europe 2020: A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/es4y/document/europe-2020-strategy-smart-sustainable-and-inclusive-growth.cs
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Council. (2010). European Council 17 June 2010 Conclusions. EUCO 13/10 CO EUR 9 CONCL 2.cs
dc.relation.ispartofFagerberg, J., & Srholec, M. (2008). National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development. Research Policy, 37(9), 1417-1435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.06.003.cs
dc.relation.ispartofHuggins, R., & Izushi, H. (2009). Regional Benchmarking in a Global Context: Knowledge, Competitiveness, and Economic Development. Economic Development Quarterly, 23(4), 275-293. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891242409347896.cs
dc.relation.ispartofHwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications. Berlin: Springer Verlag.cs
dc.relation.ispartofYan, Q., Yin, J., Baležentis, T., Makutėnienė, D., & Štreimikienė, D. (2017). Energy-related GHG emission in agriculture of the European countries: An application of the Generalized Divisia Index. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 686-694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.010.cs
dc.relation.ispartofKettani, O., Aouni, B., & Martel, J. M. (2004). The double role of the weight factor in the goal programming model. Computers & Operations Research, 31(11), 1833-1845. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(03)00142-4.cs
dc.relation.ispartofKorpysa, J. (2010). Unemployment as a Main Determinant of Entrepreneurship. Transformations in Business & Economics, 9(1), 109-123.cs
dc.relation.ispartofLane, D. (2006). From state socialism to capitalism: The role of class and the world system. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 39(2), 135-152. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.postcomstud.2006.03.003.cs
dc.relation.ispartofLi, T., Yu, W., Baležentis, T., Zhu, J., & Ji, Y. (2017). Rural demographic change, rising wages and the restructuring of Chinese agriculture. China Agricultural Economic Review, 9(4), 478-503. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CAER-02-2016-0025.cs
dc.relation.ispartofLiagouras, G. (2010). What can we learn from the failures of technology and innovation policies in the European periphery? European Urban and Regional Studies, 17(3), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776409356214.cs
dc.relation.ispartofMa, J., Balezentis, T., Zhao, Z., & Fang, C. (2017). One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in Central Asia: The study of OBOR on China and Central Asia agricultural trade. Transformation in Business & Economics, 16(3), 41-55cs
dc.relation.ispartofMaloney, W. (2004). Informality Revisited. World Development, 32(7), 1159-1178. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.01.008.cs
dc.relation.ispartofMontgomery, M. R. (2008). The Urban Transformation of the Developing World. Science, 319(5864), 761-764. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153012.cs
dc.relation.ispartofMoore, J. W. (2003). The Modern World-System as environmental history? Ecology and the rise of capitalism. Theory and Society, 32(3), 307-377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024404620759.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPorter, M. E., & Schwab, K. (2008). The Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009. Geneva: World Economic Forum.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPro-Inno Europe. (2009). European Innovation Scoreboard 2008: Comparative Analysis of Innovation Performance. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from https://www.eas.ee/images/doc/sihtasutusest/uuringud/innovatsioon/european_innovation_scoreboard_2009.pdf.cs
dc.relation.ispartofRavallion, M. (2010). The Developing World’s Bulging (but Vulnerable) Middle Class. World Development, 34(4), 445-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.11.007.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSabadie, J. A., & Johansen, J. (2010). How Do National Economic Competitiveness Indices View Human Capital? European Journal of Education, 45(2), 236-258. https://dx.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2010.01427.x.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSchumpeter, J. (1939). Business Cycles. New York: McGraw-Hill.cs
dc.relation.ispartofShannon, T. (1996). An Introduction to the World-System Perspective (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSnyder, D., & Kick, E. L. (1979). Structural Position in the World System and Economic Growth, 1955-1970: A Multiple-Network Analysis of Transnational Interactions. American Journal of Sociology, 84(5), 1096-1126. https://doi.org/10.1086/226902.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSu, W., Liu, M., Zeng, S., Štreimikienė, D., Baležentis, T., & Ališauskaitė-Šeškienė, I. (2018). Valuating renewable microgeneration technologies in Lithuanian households: A study on willingness to pay. Journal of Cleaner Production, 191, 318-329. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.199.cs
dc.relation.ispartofVan Rossem, R. (1996). The World System paradigm as general Theory of Development: A Cross-National Test. American Sociological Review, 61(3), 508-527. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096362.cs
dc.relation.ispartofWallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System. Orlando: Academic Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofWallerstein, I. (1979). The Capitalist World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofWallerstein, I. (2004). World-Systems Analysis. In World System History. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. Oxford: UNESCO, Eolss Publishers.cs
dc.relation.ispartofZeng, S., Mu, Z., & Baležentis, T. (2018). A novel aggregation method for Pythagorean fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 33(3), 573-585. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/int.21953.cs
dc.relation.ispartofZeng, S. Z., & Xiao, Y. (2018). A method based on TOPSIS and distance measures for hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(3), 969-983. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2016.1216472.cs
dc.relation.ispartofZhou, J., Su, W., Baležentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2018). Multiple Criteria Group Decision-Making Considering Symmetry with Regards to the Positive and Negative Ideal Solutions via the Pythagorean Normal Cloud Model for Application to Economic Decisions. Symmetry, 10(5), 140. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sym10050140.cs
dc.relation.ispartofZhu, N., Stjepcevic, J., Baležentis, T., Yu, Z., & Wang, B. (2017). How does corporate social responsibility impact banking efficiency: a case in China. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 20(4), 70-87.https://dx.doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2017-4-006.cs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.relation.isrefereedtrue
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjecteconomic developmenten
dc.subjectMOORAen
dc.subjectMULTIMOORAen
dc.subjectTOPSISen
dc.subjectworld-systemen
dc.subjectEuropean Unionen
dc.subjectstrategic managementen
dc.subjectinnovationen
dc.subject.classificationO10
dc.subject.classificationO31
dc.subject.classificationO32
dc.subject.classificationG10
dc.titleEvaluation of the financial and economic development of the European Union member states on basis of multiple indicators changed to multiple objectivesen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage32
local.citation.spage19
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.filenameEM_4_2018_02
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.issue4
local.relation.volume21
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_4_2018_02.pdf
Size:
1.18 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 4