Search

Serbia wants to become a member of the European union. To become a full member of the Union, Serbia must significantly improve the poor state of its economy. The paper deals with some flaw that were made in Serbia in the last decade, and that seriously slowing its ability for essential integration into the Union. The analysis is focused on four issues. First, analysis indicates that the Law on Privatization is poorly structured and even poorer implemented. The result is that the privatization process is not yet finished, and in the meantime, more than a third of privatization was canceled. In the second part is concentrated on to the bad consequences of the implementation of the Law on Privatization when it comes to the ownership of land. The wrong privatization in Serbia created respective individual possessions with 15-20000 of acres, This is completely contrary to the situation in the European Union with the domination of developed cooperative movement and family farms. The third part of the paper points out the problem of illicit capital outflow from Serbia. In relation to the national income, unfortunately, Serbia is in these field one of the leaders. Therefore are necessary emergency measures to prevent illicit outflow. When it comes to legislative activity it is noted that is more important the quality than the number of enacted laws. Future legislative activity should take into account the specificities of Serbia. Also, in order to achieve better economic results advantage should be given to the development policy, which is oriented toward the needs of Serbia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the last two centuries, the reallocation of labor out of agriculture has been a dominant feature of structural change and economic growth in the United States. This paper uses an accounting framework founded in economic theory to decompose this reallocation into three components: a demand-side effect due to the low income elasticity of demand for agricultural goods (Engel effect), and two supply-side effects, one due to differential sectoral productivity growth rates (Baumol effect), and the other to differential capital deepening. The results show that the Engel effect accounts for almost all labor reallocation until the 1950s, after which the Baumol effect becomes a key determinant. Our framework provides a unified account of long-run structural change, and demonstrates that historical interpretations and theoretical models that emphasize only one dimension of this process cannot properly account for the dramatic history of labor reallocation in the United States. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]