Yugoslavia

[Charles Jannuzi]

In trying to look for real world examples to 'test' economic models, I hit
upon a country that has always fascinated me, Yugoslavia. It would seem that
countries can find far worse ways to fail than in models for economic
planning.

For a really good introduction to what happened there post-war, try:

http://www.aspectspositions.org/essays/bianchini.html

Questions for discussion:

Did Yugoslavia enjoy relative success at economic development (despite
isolation from the Soviet Union and its satellites) because of centralized
planning and government ownership, or was the success due to some sort of
mixed model? Or was it for some other reason (western aid because of Tito's
anti-Stalinism, but a reliance on which lead to its debt crisis)?

Did Yugoslavia break up because of an economic crisis that was brought about
because of a failure at centralized planning? Or was it something else? It
would seem that the economic crisis was made worse by crushing foreign debt,
made worse by a strong dollar.

Finally,

Slovenia is supposed to be the one country to emerge from the breakup doing
the best at recovery. Why? It's not yet a full democracy, is it? It hasn't
completely privatized its economy, has it? Is it getting by because of
foreign aid from places like Austria? Or are market economics working their
magic again?

Charles Jannuzi