Professional Documents
Culture Documents
124
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
Antanas Buracas
Lithuania
Tel.:+370 5 2441829
E-mail: algiszvirblis 194 J@gmail.comancy
Lithuania
ABSTRACT.
The sustainable economic development in the new EU
countries must be oriented to definitive priorities of the competitive growth
abilities as weli as to creation of a modern knowledge-based economy. This
paper concerns the complex assessment principles of the country's
knowledge economy advancement based on the key determinants by
applying multiple criteria evaluation methods. The formulated theoretical
backgrounds are focused on the quantitative evaluation model Thus, by
evaluation, the application of different significances of composite
determinants determining the country's knowledge economy advancement
is provided. Wold Bank expert evaluations of the essential country's
primary indicators and th^ rating results are in detail analysed comparing
Baltic States and Nordic countries. According to proposed evaluation
methodology, firstly, the determinants are examined quantifiably by
experts, with the significances of them established. Applying the Simple
Additive Weighting method, secondly, the general knowledge economy
advancement index as a consolidated measure has been determined.
Lithuania's knowledge economy advancement has been evaluated
according to the 2011 situation and with account of prospective situation
scenario according proposed assessment process has been forecasted.
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
125
ISSN 1648-4460
Introduction
The enhancement of maeroeconomic development, the creation of a modem
knowledge-based economy and growth of national economic competitiveness are the
priorities of the sustainable development in the transitional economies in Eastem Europe, as
well as in the new EU Member States (Beck, Laeven, 2006; Naude, 2010; Zvirblis, Buracas,
2010).
Theoretical, as well as empirical, research works examine factors having an impact on
sustainable economic development in new EU countries, highlight the importance of
knowledge factors for long-term economic growth (Shapira, Youtie, 2006; Grundey, 2008;
Sng et al, 2009; Gries, Naude, 2010). Those papers also assert that sustained investments in
education, information and communication technologies, innovations as well as in a
favourable economic and institutional environment will lead to increases in the use and
creation of knowledge in economic production, and consequently result in sustained growth of
economic competitiveness.
Cooke (2001, 2002) presented a systematic approach on the idea and content of
regional innovation systems, clusters and the knowledge economy. Author considered the
conditions and criteria for examination of innovation activity, and emphasized, that the future
will require widespread evolution of regional innovation systems along with stronger
institutional and organizational support from the private sector. Argumented the importance of
systemic conceptual approach to the sustainable development of knowledge economy and its
complex evaluation. Some publications (Kazlauskait, Bucinien, 2008) detailed the
influence of human resource management on competitiveness, formation of individual
competencies on strategic development, some of them - on problem aspects of innovation
efficiency evaluations (Geoff et al, 2009).
The important practical complex assessment of knowledge economy parameters
leading to interstate rankings was fulfilled by The Knowledge for development (K4D),
affiliated with the World Bank experts, also developed by other researches (Shapira et al,
2006; Shapira, Youtie, 2006; Weziak, 2007). In order to facilitate the evaluations of the
transition coxmtries developing the knowledge economy (KE), the Knowledge Assessment
Methodology (KAM) was formulated. It is designed to provide a basic assessment of
countries' readiness for the knowledge economy, and identifies sectors or specific areas where
more attention on future investments is necessary. The KAM is currently being widely applied
for different World Bank research projects, and it frequently facilitates the discussions
concerning the perspective priorities of the country's sustainable development.
This methodical approach was critically discussed by Berger and Bristow (2009),
especially the validity of indices used to measure national economic performance and
competitiveness. As a result, a review of related researches has shown that the complex
assessment of the country's knowledge-based economy determinants is not analytically
detailed.
TRANSFORMATIONS IN BUSINESS (y ECONOMICS, Vol. 11, No 3 (27), 2012
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
126
ISSN 1648-4460
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
127
ISSN 1648-4460
hiiiniimii
KniiHli-d<ihiiiniiiiiv huK-x
liiconiiM- .ind
InsiiiutiiinjI
Kvfiiiiii
lnnii\.itiii
II
Lithuania
1.11
7.98
6.70
6.63
7.65
8.03
Latvia
8.42
8.76
7.56
Estonia
9.31
9.67
9.37
Finland
9.51
9.33
9.76
Sweden
9.47
9.06
9.31
Norway
Notes: All significances are calculated as average of normalized components.
1 dui.itiii
l( 1
8.40
8.35
8.32
9.77
9.29
9.60
7.99
7.58
9.05
8.73
9.66
9.10
Source: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kam2/KAM_page5.asp.
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
128
ISSN 1648-4460
TRANSFORMATIONS
A. Zvirblis, A. Buraeas
ISSN 1648-4460
-29
Burden biF
7gjvernnient...
\ Government debt
' \
.. National savings
rate
\
Value chain
breath*** 11.05
Extent and e f f e g ^ ^ ^
of taxation
2008
Lithuania 2011
Capacity for /
innovation f
Latvia 2011
State of duster
developniient
Pay and
\
Estonia 2008
productivity
Extent of markety
B Estonia 2011
/ Prevalence of
dominance/...
trade barriers
Nature o f -
yinterest rate
,
,,
spread
,>Ese of access to
revalence akans
foreign ownership
competitive...
banks
Source: Compiled by autbors witb use of WEF data: The Global Competitiveness Report.
http://www3.wefonun.org/docsAVEF_GlobalCompeti tivenessReport_2010-ll.pdf.
Figure I. Comparison of Dynamic Changes of Competitiveness Indicators in Baltic Countries
The form of cobweb diagram under review reveal the most problematic indicators and
successfully developing areas detennining the competitiveness of Baltic countries under
influence of the KE factors. In particular, within period under review for Lithuania and Latvia
the bottleneck factors become the growth of extent and effect of taxation, also low capacity
for innovation.
Table 3. Comparison of some ICT iidicators in Baltic countries, Finland and Sweden, 2009
Indicators,
ICT development
With internet access
Using internet for:
connections with public
authorities
filling forms to public
authorities
proposals
in
public
tender system
Lithuania
88
Latvia
Estonia
Business enterprises:
95
95
Finland
^ Sweden
EU27
100
95
94
64
91
79
96
86
71
. 51
35
64
83
61
55
10
23
14
15
11
96
86
95
71
74
E-goV'Srnment:
Usage by enterprises
91
54
79
On-line availability
60
55
90
Source: composed by G. Prause, M. Reidolf 2011.
89
The comparison of expert evaluations of the internet access as most decisive indicators
of ICT in Baltic countries, Finland and Sweden {Table 3) revealed diminishing distance
TRANSFORMATIONS nSf BVSnSIESS i" ECONOMICS, Vol. 11, No 3 (27), 2012
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
130
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
131
ISSN 1648-4460
% j t , , Y ^ , R j ,
(1)
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
132
ISSN 1648-4460
where h\,..., h-
(= 8).
Principal scheme of multiple criteria assessment of determinants is presented in Figure
2. Some peculiarities of expanded evaluation of the process, first-of-all, include the formation
of 2-3 pillars with task to amount more determinants concerning specific situation; they may
be formatted as a partially integrated criteria (in case under review, the determinants consist
one pillar). The next important dimension is the preparation of scenarios of every composite
determinant (when evaluating the possible impact of every primary indicator and their
combinations) as well as composition of general KE advancement scenarios.
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
133
ISSN 1648-4460
Scenarios of changes of
knowledge economy
detenninants
Predicted changes of
primary indicators
describing determinants
ISSN 1648-4460
134
A. Zvirblis, A. Buraeas
Situation
Uin=8)
Values of the
concordance coefficient W
Evaluating
Evaluating determinant
determinants
signifcances
0.72- 0.77
0.71-0.75
0.69 - 0.76
0.71-0.75
Izlas
irlas
y
de facto
24.850
24.150
OF=0.05
a=0.01
18.475
18.475
14.067
14.067
The main reliability parameter values are as follows: the concordance coefficient W
amounted to 0.69 - 0.77 when evaluating the determinants and to 0.71 - 0.75 when evaluating
the determinant significances. The concordance coefficient significance parameter x^ de facto
(number of determinants =8; degree of freedom d. f. = 7) is higher that marginal values min \] at the pre-selected level a= 0.05 and at the pre-selected level a= 0.01. The evaluation
(in the 10-point system) shown, that the general index for the Lithuania determined on the
basis of proposed model (2) of assessment is equal 4.4, its forecasted value for 2015 is equal
4.7 {Table 5).
The performed investigation and examination of Lithuania's composite determinants
revealed that fields detennining the state of clusterization and marketing sophistication, also
business expenditure for R&D determinants have to be developed first of all {Table 5). The
modernization of energy, as well as advancement in the application of alternative resources
(as complicated areas influencing the KE) could substantially ameliorate the general KE index
(KEI(I)).
Table 5. The results of expert evaluations of KE composite determinants, their significance and
determination of the general index for Lithuania
Marks
Assessment
(lOpoints
system)
KEi
2011
4.7
KE2
5.2
KEi
4.6
KE4
4.4
KEs
5.1
KEe
3.3
KE7
3.5
KEs
3.9
KEI(I)
4.4
Significances of
determinants, in %
2015
5.1
5.4
A
15
4.3
14
4.8
5.6
3.9
3.9
4.2
4.7
14
13
12
12
11
9
100
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
135
ISSN 1648-4460
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
136
ISSN 1648-4460
Geoff, S., Brychan, C.T., Gary, P. (2009), "Opportunity and innovation: Synergy within an entrepreneurial
approach to marketing". The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 10, No 1,
pp.63- 72.
Gineviius, R., Podvezko, V. (2005), "Objective and subjective approaches to determining a criterion weight in
multicriteria models". Transport and telecommunication. Vol. 6, No 1, pp.133-137.
Gineviius, R., Podvezko, V., Bruzge, S. (2008), "Evaluating the Effect of State Aid to Business by Multicriteria
Methods", Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 9, No 3, pp.167-180.
The Global Competitiveness Report (2010-2011),
Klaus
Schwab
(ed.), available
at,
http://www.weforum.org/en/media/publications/CompetitivenessReports/index.htm,
referred
on
23/10/2011.
Global
Governance
2025:
At
a
Critical
Juncture
(2010),
available
at,
http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Govemance.pdf, referred on 23/10/2011.
Global
Trends
2025:
A
Transformed
World
(2008),
available
at,
http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trnds_Final_Report.pdf, referred on 23/10/2011.
Gries, T., Naude, W. (2010), "Entrepreneurship and structural economic transformation". Small Business
Economics, Vol. 34, No 1, pp.I3-29.
Grundey, D. (2008), "Applying sustainability principles in the economy". Technological and Economic
Development of Economy, Vol. 14, No 2, pp.101-106.
Kazlauskait, R., Buinien, I. (2008), The Role of Human Resources and Their Management in the
Establishment of Sustainable Competitive Advantage", Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics,
Vol. 5,No60,pp.78-84.
Knowledge for
Development
(K4D), The World Bank Group (2011), available at,
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kani2/KAM_pagel .asp, referred on 17/10/2011.
Man, T., Lan, T., Snape, E. (2008), "Entrepreneurial Competencies and the Performance of Small and Medium
Enterprises: An Investigation through a Framework of Competitiveness", Journal of Small Business and
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 21, No 3, pp.690-708.
Mazumdar, A., Datta, S., Mahapatra, S.S. (2010), "Multicriteria decision-making models for the evaluation and
appraisal of teacher' performance". International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Vol.
6,No2,pp.213-230.
Naude, W. (2010), "Entrepreneurship, developing countries, and development economics: new approaches and
insights". Small Business Economics, Vol. 34, No 1, pp.1-12.
Peldschus, F. (2007), 'The effectiveness of assessment in multiple criteria decisions". International Journal of
Management and Decision Making, Vol. 8, No 5/6, pp.519-526.
Podvezko, V. (2007), "Determining the level of agreement of expert estimates". International Journal of
Management and Decision Making, Vol. 8, No 5/6, pp.586-600.
Podvezko, V. (2011), "The Comparative Analysis of MCDA Methods SAW and COPRAS", Inzinerine
Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, Vol. 22, No 2, pp. 134-146.
Prause, G., Reidolf, M. (2011), "What do SMEs expect from E - government services?", Business-ScienceGovemment Partnership: Fostering Country competitiveness. Conference Proceedings, International
Business School at Vilnius University, Vilnius, 21-23 Sept.
Project Europe 2030 (2010), Challenges and opportunities. A report to the European Council, available,
TRANSFORMATIONS IN BUSINESS <y ECONOMICS, Vol. 11, No 3 (27), 2012
A. Zvirblis, A. Buracas
137
ISSN 1648-4460
Copyright of Transformation in Business & Economics is the property of Vilnius University and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.