Printer Friendly

THE STATE AND DYNAMICS OF ECOECONOMY IN ROMANIA. REMARKS AND PERSPECTIVES.

We cannot exclude the existence of our economic size just as we cannot exist if we do not consume and we cannot consume without having to produce. This dictum is not shared by all the stakeholders in the world economy, and there are, it seems, the cicadas economy, focusing on savings consumption exceeds output, and ant economy, with pronounced character, whose production capacity and export consumption is higher than the import, respectively.

Why this dichotomy? At first glance, you might say that with factors of production equipment would differentiate economies, in terms of the size and structure of the aggregate supply. Also, the size and dynamics of the needs is likely to favour disadvantaged or an economy in its relations with other economies. Or, as it is stated many times in the socio-political, geopolitical and geostrategic position, there are factors determining the ratio of forces between economies. Without exceptions, all these factors must be discussed in terms of mutual interdependence, complementarity, and complicity.

As a result of the development of cutting-edge technologies, the scientific research, the unprecedented influence of media on behaviour of consumer decision-making, the ratio between resources and needs, the availabilities and needs, suffers the strong distortion, which makes the assault on economic production of goods to meet the needs, to be particularly strong. This assault has direct repercussions on how to combine economic resources, both own and acquired, and respectively needs convergent implications of the productive sector in order to supply to the demand level. The problem lies, on the one hand, in the efficient management of own resources and syndicated in the context of the continuous reduction of the conventional energy resources and the adjustment of demand in relation to its purchasing power and, on the other hand, in the management of the balance of trade imbalances, the balance of payments at the level of countries, as a result of the discrepancy between export and import.

The advantage of globalization lies in the mobility of the factors of production in order to cover the demand of economic goods in those economies where endowment with factors of production is insufficient, in which case the import is preferable. Modern economies are global economies the relative position of which is determined by the market competitiveness and efficiency ratios. We cannot exclude imports, but they are done when the relative cost of a unit production on the domestic market is the relatively higher cost of product on the market, or when the demand for factors of production may not be covered by the internal market. What is inefficient and un equivalent is the increase in imports within those countries which own factors of production but the level of production capacity does not cover partly the demand level, both quantitatively and qualitatively. What would be the reasons?

Firstly, it is the lack of orientation of economic operators in relation to the size and structure of the application, the ability to absorb it. The stimulation of the production should be correlated with the rate of the increase of consumers' real incomes, but also with the presumptive increase in relation with the presumptive loan limit of the banking and nonbanking systems. Financial-banking system can maintain artificially the demand increase by adjusting the income, which would boost the domestic production capacity or the import of goods. Secondly, it is the low dynamics of labour productivity, either as a result of the lack of adequate production facilities, the correlation of the investment plan with the structure of the offer or as a result of the combination of inefficient production factors, which have the effect of an uncompetitive production externally, in other words the failure of meeting the internal and external demand.

Also, there are certain restrictions on domestic production capacity of intensifying, such as political factors (conflict of interests with regard to facilitating the import of certain goods or economic factors; excessive bureaucracy), social factors (existence of a differentiated social structure that requires supporting disadvantaged social classes, which requires increasing public spending gains, i.e. adjusting fiscal policy), the degree of involvement of civil society in changing people's mentality as regards the act of production and consumption addressing productive sphere as an opportunity and not as a priority in the act of consumption.

In this context, the economy thank s to its actors, looks for solutions to optimize the ratio between needs and possibilities in line with the natural environment, taking into account the quantitative restrictions of the monetary and financial nature, such as the boomerang effect caused by the excesses of any kind.

At the same time, in the context of conventional resources shortages and irrational use of resources that together have generated waste, pauperism, it is necessary to create mechanisms through which to identify with the laws of nature that govern it, to use natural resources in sustainable manner, to devise strategies through which utilisation of free goods to give balance and limits the production process mainly owing to natural grade, absorption of sustainable products in the environment. This natural way of dealing with the economy is identified with eco-economy.

This analysis starts with the indicators identified in the previous chapter, grouped in accordance with 10 main themes of ecoeconomy: socio-economic development, sustainable production and consumption, social inclusion, demographic shifts, public health, energy and climate change, sustainable transport, natural resources, global partnership, and good governance.

As for the socio-economic development indicator considering both quantitative aspects of the Economic Development (investments, savings rate of the households), as well as qualitative, in the form of research and development expenditures, eco-efficiency indexes, energy intensity of the economy, relevant for the Innovation, competitiveness and eco-efficiency indicator, as well as the aspects that characterize the level of employment at the country level, including measures aimed at integrating young people who don't have a job are not present in forms of education (Young people neither in employment nor in education or training (NEET)), or the unitary cost of the nominal labour.

In our analysis we have submitted GDP per capita as an indicator to characterize the developmental level, being an indicator of falling and in the HDI (human development index).

The growth of GDP per capita in the analyzed period was due to an investment contribution, as a result of the translation of Romania's economy from the transition economy to the emerging economy. At the same time, budget allocations to areas such as education, health, sustaining infrastructure development policies have led to increased business-to-business expectations, entrepreneurship, with a direct effect on living standards. The need for training, through adaptability of the educational system to the requirements of the labor market, will decisively contribute to increasing education and interfering with the quality of life.

The importance of sustainability lies in the marginal benefit in human development, whereby incomes through the redistribution process, contributes to facilitating human development. Through human development actually it is understood the extent to which the individual reaches a certain standard of living by identifying its subjective, objective, and factual needs, generated by the economic, social, political, and cultural awareness of the ways of satisfying their reporting to existing and potential resources. Individuals, engaged in a workable economic system, develop their capacities and powers to concure the income required to satisfy societal needs. It should be noted that the scope of the needs exceeds the sphere of material needs, the tendency being to cover the needs of security, justice, governance (participation in community life, involvement in decision-making processes), education, culture, arts, and multiculturalism.

Ecoeconomy transforms the benefits of ecology and bio economics into economic policies which gives sense and rationality in economic activity, both at the level of consumption, as the defining act that supports a market economy, as well as at the level of the allocation, as a way to reduce societal inequalities.

The problems mankind is facing, from those related to the irrational use of natural resources, reaching their limits and generating increasing greenhouse gases, global warming, the intensification of natural disasters, to those generating economic crisis, prolonged recession, unemployment, structural deficits with repercussions on the quality of life, make necessary a rethinking of the economic system on the basis of rational, ethical, ecological. Naturally, ecoeconomy becomes an integrative concept which can manage unitarily environmental, social, economic, or ethical issues.

The allocation issue is obvious, especially for the fact that without effective allocation, production might lie more than the marginal cost, which would mean the waste of resources and energy etc. We believe that the allocation can be integrated into paradigms of development/growth and completely different from the traditional approach. The issue of allocation lies in the size of the scale and intensity of the increase, which takes perverse effects on a finite ecosystem, as the Earth's ecosystem, which cannot support a continuous growth of savings through the introduction of new and new needs.

Basically ecoeconomy is a complex process, integrator, generator of wealth that sustains not only to meet the vital needs of the people but also incorporating, in the measures of improving the standard of living and the quality of life of those aspects pertaining to noncommensurable individual freedoms, safety, honesty, morality, equality of opportunity, respect, and honour. Hence, thanks to ecoeconomy there is a particular attention for emphasizing the human dimension of the development policies as well as the qualitative approach of the economic growth policies on ensuring the sustainability of development and strengthening the links of causality between economic growth, human development and the natural environment.

The concept development signifies a fundamental feature of life: living beings develop throughout life, which means that they evolve. The development is a subsystem of the system of life (Capra Fritjof, 2005); evolutions within this system refer to the new forms of spontaneous order, which confers dynamism, evolution, and creativity. The development is also a living system, with its own internal structure, being in a permanent form of evolution. For this reason, a series of events with local specificities and different intensities of the concept of development can be identified.

CONCLUSION

The presentation of the two indicators reveals that Romania has to advance in terms of development, both through investments to support sustainable development, and through education and training. Ecoeconomy constitutes a chance for Romania for the purposes of the ambitions of the Europe 2020 strategy, by creating a sustainable and inclusive economy, competitive EU economies in relation to the fact that natural resources can be used eco-efficiently, sustainable jobs can be created through the rational use of land, the use of cutting-edge technologies in the creation of products, promoting them and opening new markets. The indicator that highlights sustainable economy benefits, focused on valuing natural resources according to sustainable principles, is the index of eco-innovation.

Romania is found to have recorded lower values of the indicator comparable to the developed countries of the EU, which shows the progress concerning the incorporation of innovation and research into the use of resources, labour and capital from the perspective of the production in order to cover needs in accordance with the sustainable principles.

REFERENCES

[1] Ayres, Robert and Jeroen vand den Bergh, and John Gowdy (2000), "Viewpoint: Weak versus Strong Sustainability", http://www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/98103.pdf;

[2] Capra Fritjof, (2005), Development and Sustainability, www.ecoliteracy.org

[3] Chichilnisky, G., (1998), "Sustainable development and North-South trade", Published in: Protection of Global Biodiversity (0198): pp. 101-117, http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8894/;

[4] Chichilnisky, Graciela (1995), "The economic value of the Earth's resources", MPRA Paper No.8491;

[5] Commoner, Barry (1980), Cercul care se inchide, Politica Printing House;

[6] Daly, Herman E. (1997), "Georgescu Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz", Ecological Economics 22;

[7] Danciu A.R., Niculescu Aron I.G., Gruiescu M., (2007) Statistics and econometrics, "Enciclopedica" Publisher, Bucharest;

[8] Dietz, Simon and Eric Neumayer (2006), "Weak and Strong Sustainbility in the SEEA: Concepts and Measurement", Ecological Economics 61 (4), http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/3058/1/Weak_and_strong_sustainability_in_the_SEEA_(LSERO).pdf;

[9] Goodland, R. (1996). The Concept of Environmental Sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, Vol. 26;

[10] Gowdy, J. and Mesner, S. (1998). The Evolution of Georgescu-Roegen's Bioeconomics. Review of Social Economy, Vol.LVI, No.2, http://are.berkeley.edu/courses/ARE298/Readings/goodland.pdf http://homepages.rpi.edu/~gowdyj/mypapers/RSE1998.pdf;

[11] Pearce, David and Giles Atkinson (1998), "The concept of sustainable development: An evaluation of its usfulness ten years after Brundtland", Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Vol.134 (3);

[12] http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/web/table/description.jsp,codetsdnr100.

Oana Mihaela Vacaru (1*) Cristina Teodora Balaceanu (2) Mihaela Gruiescu (3)

(1*) corresponding author, PhD Candidate, the Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Romania, oanna.vacaru@gmail.com

(2) Professor of Economic, "Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University in Bucharest, movitea@yahoo.com;

(3) Associate Professor of Statistics and Econometrics, Romanian American University / Academy of Economic Studies in Bucharest, mihaela.gruiescu@csie.ase.ro.
Table 1. Real GDP/inhabitant, Euro

Real GDP/ inhabitant, Euro

Country\year    2007    2008    2009    2010    2011    2012    2013

UE-28           26200   26200   25000   25400   25800   25600   25600
Belgium         34000   34000   32900   33500   33900   33700   33500
Bulgaria         4900    5300    5100    5100    5200    5300    5400
Czech           15200   15400   14600   14900   15200   15000   15000
Republic
Denmark         46200   45600   43000   43500   43900   43700   43400
Germany         32100   32500   30800   32100   33300   33400   33400
Estonia         13300   12600   10800   11000   11900   12600   12800
Ireland         40700   39000   36500   36400   37200   37200   37600
Greece          22700   22600   21500   20300   18500   17200   16800
Spain           24500   24400   23300   23200   22900   22300   22000
France          31500   31400   30300   30800   31200   31200   31200
Croatia         11200   11500   10600   10500   10500   10300   10200
Italy           28700   28200   26500   26800   26900   26000   25400
Cyprus          24200   24500   23300   23000   22600   21700   20400
Latvia          10200    9900    8600    8500    9200    9700   10000
Lithuania        9800   10100    8700    9000    9800   10300   10800
Luxembourg      82900   80800   75100   77900   78100   75600   76900
Hungary         10300   10400    9700    9800   10000    9900   10100
Malta           15500   16000   15500   15900   16200   16500   17000
The             38900   39400   37700   38000   38500   37900   37600
Netherland
Austria         35700   36100   34700   35200   36100   36200   36100
Poland           8600    8900    9100    9400    9900   10000   10100
Portugal        17200   17200   16700   17000   16700   16100   16000
Romania          6100    6700    6300    6300    6400    6400    6700
Slovenia        18600   19200   17500   17700   17800   17300   17100
Slovakia        11900   12600   11800   12400   12800   13000   13200
Finland         37200   37300   34000   34900   35600   34900   34500
Sweden          40400   39800   37400   39400   40100   39700   39800
Great           30500   30100   28700   28900   29200   29400   29800
Britain

Country\year    2014      2015

UE-28           25900     26300
Belgium         33800     34100
Bulgaria         5500      5700
Czech           15200     :
Republic
Denmark         43700     43900
Germany         33800     34100
Estonia         13200     13400
Ireland         39500     42300
Greece          17000     17000
Spain           22400     23100
France          31100     :
Croatia         10200     10400
Italy           25300     25500
Cyprus          20100     20600
Latvia          10400     10800
Lithuania       11200     11500
Luxembourg      78200     80500
Hungary         10500     10900
Malta           17500     18400
The             37900     38500
Netherland
Austria         36000     36000
Poland          10500     10900
Portugal        16300     16600
Romania          6900      7200
Slovenia        17600     18000
Slovakia        13500     14000
Finland         34100     34200
Sweden          40300     41600
Great           30400     30900
Britain

Source: processed after www.eurostat.org

Table 2. Human development index, 2015

Countary          HDI       Life           Number of       The main
                            expectancy     school years    promoted
                            at birth       estimated as    school years
                                           promoted

                  Value     years          years           years
                  2014      2014           2014            2014

Denmark           0.923     80.2           18.7            12.7
The Netherland    0.922     81.6           17.9            11.9
Germany           0.916     80.9           16.5            13.1
Ireland           0.919     80.9           18.6            12.2
Sweden            0.907     82.2           15.8            12.1
Great Britain     0.907     80.7           16.2            13.1
Luxemburg         0.892     81.8           13.9            11.7
Belgium           0.89      80.8           16.3            11.3
France            0.888     82.2           16              11.1
Austria           0.885     81.4           15.7            10.8
Finland           0.883     80.8           17.1            10.3
Slovenia          0.88      80.4           16.8            11.9
Spain             0.883     82.6           17.3             9.6
Italy             0.873     83.1           16              10.1
Czech             0.87      78.6           16.4            12.3
Republic
Greece            0.865     80.9           17.6            10.3
Estonia           0.861     76.8           16.5            12.5
Cypruss           0.85      80.2           14              11.6
Slovakia          0.844     76.3           15.1            12.2
Poland            0.843     77.4           15.5            11.8
Lithuania         0.839     73.3           16.4            12.4
Malta             0.839     80.6           14.4            10.3
Portugal          0.83      80.9           16.3             8.2
Hungary           0.828     75.2           15.4            11.6
Letonia           0.819     74.2           15.2            11.5
Croatia           0.818     76.2           14.8            11
Romania           0.793     74.7           14.2            10.8
Bulgaria          0.782     74.2           14.4            10.6

Countary           Gross
                   domestic
                   income per
                   capita

                   Euro
                   2014

Denmark            44,025
The Netherland     45,435
Germany            43,919
Ireland            39,568
Sweden             45,636
Great Britain      39,267
Luxemburg          58,711
Belgium            41,187
France             38,056
Austria            43,869
Finland            38,695
Slovenia           27,852
Spain              32,045
Italy              33,030
Czech              26,660
Republic
Greece             24,524
Estonia            25,214
Cypruss            28,633
Slovakia           25,845
Poland             23,177
Lithuania          24,500
Malta              27,903
Portugal           25,757
Hungary            22,916
Letonia            22,281
Croatia            19,409
Romania            18,108
Bulgaria           15,596

Source: data processed from www.eurostat.org
COPYRIGHT 2017 Romanian-American University
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Vacaru, Oana Mihaela; Balaceanu, Cristina Teodora; Gruiescu, Mihaela
Publication:Journal of Information Systems & Operations Management
Article Type:Essay
Geographic Code:4EXRO
Date:Nov 1, 2017
Words:2883
Previous Article:THE ELIMINATION METHOD OF FOURIER-MOTZKIN IN LINEAR PROGRAMMING.
Next Article:UNIVERSE SIMULATORS.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters