Numerous studies in academic literature study bioeconomy as part of the worldwide desire to find new or more sustainable ways to obtain economic and cultural growth. They view it as a new economic sector used to invent, promote and develop processes compatible with a durable environment. Bioeconomics has had a constant development in scientific literature in the last two centuries. It was created to link to powerful sciences: biology and economics, in an endeavor to broaden the existing theories in both disciplines or create new ones. The connection was created two-fold: using economic concepts and models to analyze biological phenomena or using a biological perspective to study economic behavior. This paper endeavors to present a brief overview of the different approaches found in literature concerning the concepts of “bioeconomy” and "bioeconomics", their similarities, differences and areas or overlap.

International portfolio management is influenced by the existence of “frictions”, factors or events that interfere with trade, which are linked in financial literature to market-specific factors, such as available information, restrictions, investor protection, or market liquidity. Given the wide variety of factors that can be included in these categories, scientific studies typically focus on a reduced number of indicators at a time in order to offer an in depth analysis of their impact. We offer a consolidated view of the perspectives observed in financial literature by proposing a novel index for market frictions that includes all these four components and rank fifteen post-communist East European capital markets based on their index values. We then constructed various scenarios by assuming different levels of importance for the criteria used in index construction. By employing grey clustering analysis, we cluster these capital markets into three categories—strongly recommended, recommended with some reserve, and not recommended—based on the importance given by the decision maker to these factors. The results show that some of the studied markets are in the same cluster, irrespective of the chosen scenario. The only market always included in the “strongly recommended” category is Hungary, indicating that it is a good investment option for international participants. Bulgaria and Slovakia are always regarded as “recommended with reserve” markets, whereas the Republic of Moldova is part of the “not recommended” category. The other markets show a degree of variability that can be explained by different investor perspectives. This study contributes to the existing literature by combining the advantages of grey clustering and portfolio analysis. Investors can use this approach during the decision-making process related to their investments.

This paper studies the presence of the day-of-the-week (DOW) effect in the financial contagion process observed on individual economic sectors from the Post-Communist East European markets. The only markets that provide national-specific sector indices determined throughout the 2008 financial crisis are Poland, Romania and Russia. The novel methodology combines two existing perspectives from financial literature, by employing a GJR-GARCH framework on a dummy regression model that accounts for both the crisis period and the weekdays. All indices show the presence of the DOW effect during the crisis and/or non-crisis periods, thus signaling their low level of market efficiency. However, the contagion process affects only eight of these indices: the banking, IT and oil and gas sectors from Poland, the chemical, telecommunication and transport sectors from Russia and energy sectors from Russia and Romania. All of them show signs of the DOW effect in contagion: five exhibit higher spillovers on crisis Mondays, while the other three show other weekday patterns. The findings suggest that the DOW effect is not specific to certain countries or certain economic sectors.