uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
From anonymity to identity: Network transformation in economies and industries in transition from plan to market
Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Business Studies.
2016 (English)In: Extending the Business Network Approach: New Territories, New Technologies, New Terms / [ed] Peter Thilenius, Cecilia Pahlberg, Virpi Havila, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, p. 41-66Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Perhaps the most striking institutional change over the last 30 years is the transition from some kind of state-governed and planned economy to a more open economic system governed by the market. This development has occurred or is currently occurring in countries that are often labelled transition economies or emerging markets. Included among these countries are China, India and Russia, as well as most other countries in the ‘communist bloc’ in the former Soviet Union, as well as Central and Eastern Europe. Within the market economies of Europe, similar, although less dramatic, changes in the mix between planned and market exchange have been implemented. Industrial sectors, for instance telecom, air transport and energy, have been transformed from plan governance to open market governance through an institutional deregulation. The plans and the associated authorities in planned economies are being abolished, prices are being liberalised and the countries, or the industrial sectors, are moving towards increasingly open market economies. The relative merits and problems of the two modes of coordination of economic life have been analysed and discussed in a number of studies. Coase (1937), Hayek (1945) and Williamson (1975) are examples of scholars who have analysed the plan (hierarchy) versus the market mechanism of economic coordination.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. p. 41-66
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-310291DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-53765-2_3Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84978333067ISBN: 9781137537652 (print)ISBN: 9781137537638 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-310291DiVA, id: diva2:1056455
Available from: 2016-12-14 Created: 2016-12-13 Last updated: 2016-12-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Johanson, Jan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Johanson, Jan
By organisation
Department of Business Studies
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 515 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf