The methodologies of shadow economy estimation in the world and in Lithuania: whether the criterions fixing digital shadow are included?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The article covers an extremely topical but hardly researched problem of digital shadow economy estimation. Thus far, the phenomenon of digital shadow economy has not been universally defined either by scientists or by institutions responsible for the combat with shadow economy. Traditional shadow economy is commonly estimated applying direct and indirect methods possessing their strengths and weaknesses. As a result, final estimations of shadow economies are rather variant. For instance, with reference to Schneider (2014), the scope of shadow economy in Lithuania achieved 27 per cent rate in 2014 whereas the figure estimated by Lithuanian Department of Statistics composed 15 per cent rate. It can be presumed that the divergence of the results has been determined by application of different shadow economy estimation methods. The interviews with the experts of shadow economy have revealed that although the volumes of e-trade and e-transactions are increasing, indicators of digital shadow are not still included in the estimations of shadow economy.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)753-760
JournalProcedia. Economics and finance
Volume39
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Methodology
Lithuania
Shadow economy
Statistics
Divergence

Keywords

  • Shadow economy
  • Lithuania
  • Digital shadow economy
  • Economy evaluation
  • Direct and indirect methods

Cite this

@article{4e43f36b3f264f2bb19d355021ff303c,
title = "The methodologies of shadow economy estimation in the world and in Lithuania: whether the criterions fixing digital shadow are included?",
abstract = "The article covers an extremely topical but hardly researched problem of digital shadow economy estimation. Thus far, the phenomenon of digital shadow economy has not been universally defined either by scientists or by institutions responsible for the combat with shadow economy. Traditional shadow economy is commonly estimated applying direct and indirect methods possessing their strengths and weaknesses. As a result, final estimations of shadow economies are rather variant. For instance, with reference to Schneider (2014), the scope of shadow economy in Lithuania achieved 27 per cent rate in 2014 whereas the figure estimated by Lithuanian Department of Statistics composed 15 per cent rate. It can be presumed that the divergence of the results has been determined by application of different shadow economy estimation methods. The interviews with the experts of shadow economy have revealed that although the volumes of e-trade and e-transactions are increasing, indicators of digital shadow are not still included in the estimations of shadow economy.",
keywords = "Shadow economy, Lithuania, Digital shadow economy, Economy evaluation, Direct and indirect methods",
author = "Ligita Gasparėnienė and Rita Remeikienė",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30277-5",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "753--760",
journal = "Procedia. Economics and finance",
issn = "2212-5671",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The methodologies of shadow economy estimation in the world and in Lithuania: whether the criterions fixing digital shadow are included?

AU - Gasparėnienė, Ligita

AU - Remeikienė, Rita

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - The article covers an extremely topical but hardly researched problem of digital shadow economy estimation. Thus far, the phenomenon of digital shadow economy has not been universally defined either by scientists or by institutions responsible for the combat with shadow economy. Traditional shadow economy is commonly estimated applying direct and indirect methods possessing their strengths and weaknesses. As a result, final estimations of shadow economies are rather variant. For instance, with reference to Schneider (2014), the scope of shadow economy in Lithuania achieved 27 per cent rate in 2014 whereas the figure estimated by Lithuanian Department of Statistics composed 15 per cent rate. It can be presumed that the divergence of the results has been determined by application of different shadow economy estimation methods. The interviews with the experts of shadow economy have revealed that although the volumes of e-trade and e-transactions are increasing, indicators of digital shadow are not still included in the estimations of shadow economy.

AB - The article covers an extremely topical but hardly researched problem of digital shadow economy estimation. Thus far, the phenomenon of digital shadow economy has not been universally defined either by scientists or by institutions responsible for the combat with shadow economy. Traditional shadow economy is commonly estimated applying direct and indirect methods possessing their strengths and weaknesses. As a result, final estimations of shadow economies are rather variant. For instance, with reference to Schneider (2014), the scope of shadow economy in Lithuania achieved 27 per cent rate in 2014 whereas the figure estimated by Lithuanian Department of Statistics composed 15 per cent rate. It can be presumed that the divergence of the results has been determined by application of different shadow economy estimation methods. The interviews with the experts of shadow economy have revealed that although the volumes of e-trade and e-transactions are increasing, indicators of digital shadow are not still included in the estimations of shadow economy.

KW - Shadow economy

KW - Lithuania

KW - Digital shadow economy

KW - Economy evaluation

KW - Direct and indirect methods

U2 - 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30277-5

DO - 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30277-5

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 753

EP - 760

JO - Procedia. Economics and finance

JF - Procedia. Economics and finance

SN - 2212-5671

ER -