1、本科毕业论文外文翻译 外文题目： The Effect of Trade and FDI on Employment in central and Eastern European Countries: A Country-Specific Panel Data Analysis for the Manufacturing Industry 出 处： European Community Studies Association of Austria Publication Series, 1, Volume 12, The EU and Emerging Markets, Part 2, Pa
2、ges 71-94 作 者 : zlem Onaran 原 文： The Effect of Trade and FDI on Employment in Central and Eastern European Countries:A Country-Specific Panel Data Analysis for the Manufacturing Industry Abstract This paper analyzes the labor demand based on panel data of manufacturing industry from Central and East
3、ern European Countries and discusses the effect of domestic factors (wages and output) and international factors (trade and FDI) on employment in the post-transition period. The findings indicate that employment only responds to wages in 50 per cent of the cases. The output elasticity of labor deman
4、d is mostly positive, but low, with a number of cases where employment is completely de-linked from output. An impressive speed of integration to the European economic sphere through FDI and international trade has not prevented job losses in the manufacturing industry. While there are very few case
5、s of positive effects, insignificant effects of trade and FDI dominate, some evidence of negative effects appears as well. I. Introduction This paper aims at exploring the development of employment in Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) in the post-transition period and the employment eff
6、ects of integration into the world economy on employment, in particular with the European economic sphere through trade openness and FDI. In the early 1990s, during the initial phase of transition, CEECs faced a severe recession due to both supply and demand shocks as well as major institutional cha
7、nges. The adjustment in labor markets to these shocks took place under the starting conditions of high levels of disguised unemployment along with high labor force participation rates in the centrally planned economies due to the target of full employment (Brada, 1989； Kornai, 1995； Blanchard, 1998)
8、. Nevertheless, in the early phase of transition the reduction in output was much more pronounced than the increase in unemployment. Izyumov and Vahaly (2002) show that the linkages between unemployment change and output were highly unstable during the early transition period. The political concerns
9、 about unemployment, the preservation of soft budget constraints in many state owned firms,low labor mobility particularly due to firm-specific non-wage benefits or infra-structure problems are cited as some reasons explaining this inertia. The transition crisis was replaced by a recovery in output
10、starting in the second half of the 1990s in the Visegard Countries and Slovenia and in the late 1990s in the Baltic States and Bulgaria and Romania, but as market transition matured dramatic changes in the sectoral employment structure and wages emerged in the CEECs (Havlik and Landesmann, 2005； Boe
11、ri and Terrell, 2002). In general, compared to the pre-transition era there has been a sharp contraction in employment, an increase in open unemployment, a massive exit from the labor market, and only moderate job creation. One question is how much of that negative development in employment in the p
12、ost-transition era can be related to the previous labor hoarding. While earlier research on “idle employment” in the CEECs indicates a continuation of the problem (eg. Kajzer, 1995； Jackman, 1994) or even an increase in “overemployment” or “labor hoarding” (e.g. Gora, 1995) during the early transiti
13、on era, later studies find out that employment became much more responsive to recessions after the mid 1990s, indicating that the labor hoarding problem of the previous phase had already started to be reversed(Boeri and Garibaldi, 2006； Basu et al., 2005)； also firms in the transition economies star
14、ted to impose hard budget constraints on each other later in the transition phase (Schaffer, 1998). Basu et al. (2005) estimate employment elasticities with respect to sales based on firm level data and find that Hungary had already high elasticities at the beginning of the transition phase； Poland
15、went into the transition less reformed but achieved high elasticities in the transition years； and the Czech Republic and Slovakia also rapidly reached high elasticities, although they started from employment regimes, which were rather unresponsive to sales. Furthermore, the evidence presented by Ba
16、su et al. (2005) does not support the hypothesis that State Owned Enterprises responded less flexibly to changes in sales. Based on a panel data analysis for the aggregate economy, Boeri and Garibaldi (2006) show that in the aftermath of 1996, recession periods led to significant job destruction, wh
17、ereas expansions in GDP did not lead to statistically significant job creation in the CEE-10. Indeed high rates of output growth in the CEECs in the post-recession era generated fewer jobs than stagnation in the other countries of the EU (Boeri and Garibaldi, 2006).Izyumov and Vahaly (2002) find a l
18、ower Okuns coefficient of -0.526 (effect of GDP growth on the change in unemployment) in the 10 CEECs in the post-recession era of 1995-2000 compared to the coefficient for EU15 (-0.799). Based on the empirical evidence in Basu et al. (2005) and Boeri and Garibaldi (2006) that labor hoarding had alr
19、eady started to be reversed during the transition era,the continuation of the problem of slow employment growth more than a decade after the starting of a major processes of privatization and structural change is worth further analysis going beyond the old over employment problems of the planned economies. Lehmann (1995) argues that severe and persistent shortages in capital and managerial ability
