C. Richard Neu
In listening to the conference discussions, I have been struck by the depth of the thinking that has been reflected here. One speaker after another has pointed to the fundamental issues that have to be resolved in designing development strategies for Eastern Europe: How fast can or should privatization proceed? Is microeconomic reform possible before macroeconomic stabilization has been accomplished? Which among the many needs of the East European economies should be given priority in aid programs? Should aid be seen as a necessary precursor to economic reform, providing East European governments with enough slack to institute potentially painful reforms, or should it be seen as a reward, provided only after recipient governments have demonstrated their willingness to make hard choices?
These are important questions, and it is useful for the academic and policy communities represented here to debate them. We have not resolved them, but I think we have made some progress. At the very least, we have a clearer idea of the lines of research and deliberation that will form the basis for the continuing inquiry these