The suspense-filled attempted partial privatization of the Narva Power Plants in the neo-liberal darling Estonia involved a rich cast, from trade unions and local scientists, via Estonian courts and ombudsmen to international consulting firms, major global banks and the US government. More important, a detailed single case study on the democratic decision-making process in this privatization case makes it possible to go beyond common generalizations regarding the consequences of neo-liberalism for democratic processes. It shows that purported proponents of economic neo-liberalism such as the US government sometimes use their arguments to advance the narrow business interests of politically well-connected firms. Established private firms can behave in a more rent-seeking manner than publicly owned, ex-communist companies. Liberal economic principles of open competition and a level playing-field are at times used by actors in the democratic process to question top-down, opaque economic decisions.

This article examines Estonia’s economic institutions, performance and vulnerability to the global economic crisis in the context of the varieties of capitalism framework. It shows that Estonia shares many characteristics of a liberal market economy, but that there are also some features which do not fit the classical model, notably its corporate governance institutions. It also suggests that the varieties of capitalism framework can account for key features of Estonia’s economic performance, including its growth trajectory and adjustment to the global financial crisis. The article also reflects on the broader significance of these findings for understanding post-communist capitalism.

This article provides an in-depth exploration of the nature of the cultural shift in business norms in two former Soviet Union republics: Estonia and Belarus. While questioning the linearity of existing models describing social—cultural change and, drawing on Lotman’s model (1990), the paper points to a complex interplay of past and present, Western and local traditions in the transformational context of the post-Soviet countries. The analysis is based on a set of semi-structured in-depth interviews with Belarusian and Estonian entrepreneurs, who conveyed their attitudes towards transition and current management practices in the region. Exploring the issue on both a temporal (pre-Soviet and post-Soviet) and a spatial (Western/non-Western) axis the paper discusses the relationship between the ‘importing’ and ‘exporting’ of values, which take place across each of them, and concludes with what the analysis can tell us about cultural transformation more generally.

The authors proceed from the assumption that the institutional and economic efficiency of a particular country (or society) depends on its historic legacy or ‘path-dependence’, strategic interactions of the elite and the impact of the international environment. Estonia and Slovenia are both — not only economically, but also institutionally — perceived as relatively successful and prominent post-communist countries and new members of the EU. Yet they have developed completely different — in some aspects even diametrically opposite — regulative settings and socio-political arrangements. The main emphasis is on the connection between the dynamics and ideological preferences of political actors and the pace of reforms as well as institutional regulations. One can argue that the political elite in Estonia encouraged the shaping of the state in a direction close to the liberal-market model, whereas Slovenia is closer to the corporatist social welfare-state model. In both cases, some dysfunctional effects are evident that represent a new challenge to the elites and, at the same time, a test of their credibility and competence.

This article assesses how the character of emerging legislative elites conforms to the broader patterns of post-communist social transformation by comparing Estonia, Lithuania and Moldova. We argue that the pace and direction of change among MPs has been significantly shaped by the nature of regime change in each country. We first address the issue of pace and scope of elite replacement. Second, we examine whether and to what extent, over time, changes occurred in the parliamentary representation of major social categories (in particular, ethnic minorities, women, age groups). Third, we examine the dynamics of political professionalization.

This paper focuses on Estonia's post-communist transition and attempts to determine why it has been more successful than the other two Baltic states, Lithuania and Latvia. It proposes that the central factor conditioning the outcome of the Baltic states' transition process was their different experiences during the Soviet period. Although the post-independence reform program itself played a crucial role in Estonia's successful transition, the paper concludes that the seeds for the country's achievements can actually be found in its Soviet legacy: Estonia's selection of policies, their implementation and the resulting positive outcome were all dependent on favorable conditions which had been established in Estonia during the Soviet period. Significantly, these positive conditions had not been created in the other two Baltic states.