The Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) was concluded among the countries of Southeastern Europe with the aim to promote further trade integration. The agreement states the objective to 'expand trade in goods and services and foster investment by means of fair, clear, stable and predictable rules.' While recent literature on trade in the CEFTA region has focused on analyzing trade in goods, the purpose of the paper is to identify the remaining barriers to trade in services among the CEFTA countries. The paper presents: (i) the economic and trade importance of the service sector in CEFTA countries, and (ii) the existing barriers to trade in services between CEFTA countries, with a focus on four sectors: construction, land transport, legal and information technology (ICT) services. The analysis shows that the export of services has a significant share in CEFTA countries. These countries have achieved considerable market openness, mostly in the context of pursuing WTO and EU accession. Nonetheless, obstacles to trade in services remain. Some, such as the movement of professional workers, are of general nature, while others are sector specific.

The countries of the Southeast Europe region have the common objective of joining the European Union (EU). To achieve this goal, these countries have pursued closer integration with the EU and with each other, including signing the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA). CEFTA aims to fully liberalize trade in the region and work toward greater cooperation in a number of trade-related areas, such as investment, services, public procurement, and intellectual property rights. This paper aims to help policy makers in Southeast Europe assess the impact of the recently introduced trade policy measures, and proposes actions that could complement these measures and help achieve greater regional trade integration. The paper considers intra-regional trade flows and the remaining nontariff barriers to trade, the benefits of allowing free movement of skilled labor in the region, and how adopting the EU's Common External Tariff could prevent trade diversion.

The future sustainable economic development and well-being of citizens in South East Europe depend on greater economic competitiveness. Reinforcing the region’s economic potential in a post-COVID-19 context requires a holistic, inclusive and growth‐oriented approach to policy making.

The public debt crisis in Europe has shaken the confidence not just in the Euro, but in the European model. Aging and uneconomical Europeans are being squeezed between innovative Americans and efficient Asians, it is said. With debt and demographics dragging down them down, one hears that European economies will not grow much unless radically new ways are discovered. The end of complacency in Europe is a good thing, but this loss of confidence could be dangerous. The danger is that in a rush to rejuvenate growth, the attractive attributes of the European development model could be abandoned along with the weak. In fact, the European growth model has many strong points and enviable accomplishments. One can say without exaggeration that Europe had invented a convergence machine , taking in poor countries and helping them become high income economies. World Bank research has identified 27 countries that have grown from middle-income to high income since 1987: a few thanks to the discovery and exploitation of massive natural resources (e.g.: oil in Oman and Trinidad and Tobago), several others like Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea, embracing aggressive export-led strategies which involved working and saving a lot, postponing political liberties, and looking out only for themselves. But half of the countries that have grown from middle income to high income Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia are actually in Europe. This is why the European model was so attractive and unique, and why with some well designed efforts it ought to be made right again.

"This book will be a valuable addition to the existing literature in the area, appealing to academics and researchers in European and transition studies."--BOOK JACKET.

Scholars and practitioners alike agree that somehow the past needs to be addressed in order to enable individuals and collectives to rebuild trust and relationships. However, they also continue to struggle with critical questions. When is the right moment to address the legacies of the past after violent conflict? How can societies address the past without deepening the pain that arises from memories related to the violence and crimes committed in war? How can cultures of remembrance be established that would include and acknowledges the victims of all sides involved in violent conflict? How can various actors deal constructively with different interpretations of facts and history? Two decades after the wars, societies in Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia – albeit to different degrees – are still facing the legacies of the wars of the 1990s on a daily basis. Reconciliation between and within these societies remains a formidable challenge, given that all three countries are still facing unresolved disputes either at a cross-border level or amongst parallel societies that persist at a local community level. This book engages scholars and practitioners from the regions of former Yugoslavia, as well as international experts, to reflect on the achievements and obstacles that characterise efforts to deal with the past. Drawing variously on empirical studies, theoretical discussions, and practical experience, their contributions offer invaluable insights into the complex relationship between transitional justice and conflict transformation.

This comprehensive exploration of the new international environment examines not only traditional political-military concerns but also economic, ethnic, and other factors in the security environment of Russia and its neighbors to the west, (Vol. 1), south (Vol. 2), and east (Vol. 3). This dynamic approach takes account of both internal and external aspects of security problems and their interplay. International authors participate in considering each problem from all relevant points of view.

Inclusive and sustainable economic growth in the six Western Balkan (WB6) economies depends on greater economic competitiveness. Although the gap is closing gradually, the standards of living in WB6 are well below those of the OECD and EU. Accelerating the rate of socio-economic convergence will require a holistic and growth oriented approach to policy making. This is the fourth study of the region (formerly under the title 'Competitiveness in South East Europe') and it comprehensively assesses policy reforms in the WB6 economies across 15 policy areas key to strengthening their competitiveness. It enables WB6 economies to compare economic performance against regional peers, as well as EU-OECD good practices and standards, and to design future policies based on rich evidence and actionable policy recommendations. The regional profile presents assessment findings across five policy clusters crucial to accelerating socio-economic convergence of the WB6 by fostering regional co-operation: business environment, skills, infrastructure and connectivity, digital transformation and greening. Economy-specific profiles complement the regional assessment, offering each WB6 economy an in-depth analysis of their policies supporting competitiveness. They also track the implementation of the previous 2021 study's recommendations and provide additional ones tailored to the economies’ evolving challenges. These recommendations aim to inform structural economic reforms and facilitate the region’s socio-economic convergence towards the standards of the EU and OECD.

Using an innovative methodology, the Investment Reform Index 2010 monitors investment-related policy reforms in the economies of South-East Europe and compares these to best practices in the OECD area.