Ivan Jakubec

ORCID: 0000-0002-9793-9254
Prague University of Economics and Business, Czech Republic
E-mail: [Link]@[Link]
DOI: 10.55159/tri.2023.0102.02

Strengths and Weaknesses of the

Economy of the First Czechoslovak
Republic (1918–1938)

Abstract

The paper focuses on the strengths and weaknesses of the inter-

war Czechoslovakian economy. These included the readiness
for the transition to an independent economy, the different
economic levels of different parts of the new state, the elim-
ination of transport “handicaps” of the new state by peace
treaties, foreign trade policy, interwar economic development
and the economic place of Czechoslovakia in Europe and the
world. Although Czechoslovakia did not replace the impor-
tance of Vienna in terms of stock exchange and insurance,
or Berlin’s position in terms of economics and transport, and
failed to establish itself permanently in the Balkans, it proved
its economic viability during its historically defined existence
and did not become a destabilising factor in Central European
or European economies.

Keywords

Czechoslovakia, interwar period, industry, foreign trade

Suggested citation: Jakubec I. (2023). Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy

of the First Czecho­slovak Republic (1918–1938). Trimarium. The History and Literature
of Central and Eastern European Countries, 2(2), 37–64.
doi: 10.55159/tri.2023.0102.02
Submitted: 03.04.2023 / Accepted: 17.04.2023 37
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

The literature on the economic history of interwar Czechoslovakia

is very rich. The last time the issue was discussed was in connection
with the centenary of the founding of the state in 1918. Here we must
mention the collective monograph Czechoslovakia: History of the
State (Československo: Dějiny státu, 2018)1 and the Encyclopedia of
Czech Law History (Encyklopedie českých právních dějin, Plzeň–Ostrava
2015–2023), which contains several concepts from the economic
sphere.2 Older works have not lost their value either.3 The author has
used published and unpublished archival documents from Czech
(National Archives in Prague, Archives of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of the Czech Republic in Prague) and foreign (Staatsarchiv
Hamburg, The Kew State Archives) archives and periodical and
contemporary literature. Let us look at the strengths and weaknesses
of the interwar Czechoslovak economy, which were, however, very
closely interconnected, as the following discussion shows.

1. The economic base of the former monarchy

The new state “inherited” 26% of its population (13 612 424 citi-
zens) (1921) and 21% of its territory (140 394 sq km) from the former
monarchy with about 60–70% of its industrial capacity and 27% of
its agricultural production. The Czech lands (Bohemia, Moravia and
Silesia) formed the basis of Czechoslovakia’s economic potential
(Kubů and Pátek, 2000; Lacina, 1996), and the Czech lands clearly
belonged to the economic core of the monarchy. This fact is certainly
one of its strengths, but it also contains weaknesses. The industry
of the Bohemian lands was conceived for the monarchy, i.e., about

1 Dejmek, J. et al. (2018). Československo. Dějiny státu. Praha: Libri.

2 Schelle, K.–Tauchen, J. (eds.) (2015–2023). Encyklopedie českých právních dějin, 22
vol., Praha–Ostrava: Aleš Čeněk.
3 Kárník, Z. (2018). České země v éře První republiky, 2. ed. 3 vol.. Praha: Libri;
Kubů, E. – Pátek, J. (eds.) (2000). Mýtus a realita hospodářské vyspělosti mezi-
válečného Československa, Praha: Karolinum, p. 11; Lacina, V. (1990). Formování
československé ekonomiky 1918–1923. Praha: Academie; Průcha, V. et al. (2004–
2009). Hospodářské a sociální dějiny Československa 1918–1992. 2 vol. Brno: Do-
plněk; Hallon, Ľ. (1995). Industrializácia Slovenska 1918–1938: (rozvoj alebo
úpadok?). Brati­slava: Veda; Teichová, A. (1988). Wirtschaftsgeschichte der
Tsche­choslowakei 1918–1980. Wien: Böhlau.

38
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

52 million inhabitants, and now at least one-third of the production

had to be exported abroad, even though the goods were actually
flowing to the same customers.
The importance of the Bohemian lands for the monarchy can
also be demonstrated by the share of direct and indirect taxes of
Cisleithania (Austria). In the case of direct taxes, it was one-third,
and in the case of indirect taxes, it was almost two-thirds. In addition,
most of the large industrial enterprises had their formal headquar-
ters in Vienna, where they paid one-fifth of their taxes.

Table 1
Regional development of tax revenues 1900–1913 (in %)

Direct Indirect
1900 1913 1900 1913
taxes taxes

Alpine
48.9 52.6 20.4 21.6
countries

Czech lands 35.5 32.9 63.0 59.5

Bukovina
10.4 9.2 13.9 16.7
and Galicia

Source: Sandgruber, R. (1978). Wirtschaftswachstum, Energie und Verkehr in

Österreich 1840–1913. In Kellenbenz, H. (Hg.). Wirtschaftliches Wachstum, Energie
und Verkehr vom Mittelalter bis ins 19. Jahrhundert. Bericht über die 6. Arbeitstagung
der Gesellschaft für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Stuttgart–New York:
Gustav Fischer, Tab. 2, p. 82.

In 1927, based on the calculations by Hungarian statistician F. Fellner,

the Czechoslovak statistician F. Bíbl (Bíbl, 1927; Jindra, 1998) estimated
that Czech lands accounted for 41.2% of the gross national wealth of
Cisleithania before 1914, Slovakia and Subcarpathian Rus for 16.3%
of Transleithania, and the later-created independent Czechoslovak
Republic for 32.1% of the gross national wealth of the whole monarchy
(excluding Bosnia and Herzegovina)4.

4 The value of real estate (land, mines, smelters and buildings), movable property
and means of transport, excluding foreign debts or claims.

39
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

A more accurate visualisation of the position of the Czech lands

within the Cisleithanian Commonwealth is given by D. F. Good,
who reports the Czech lands having a 44.9% share of the national
income of Cisleithania in 1911–1913, with an average of 676 crowns
per capita (Good, 1986; ), which exceeded the Cisleithanian level of
569 crowns per capita.

2. Readiness for the 1918 coup and the transition to an inde-

pendent economy

Among the strengths were the readiness of politicians, econo-

mists and other officials in particular to take over political and
economic power, personified by the Draft Political Law and the
Draft Economic Law (“Návrh zákona politického” and “Návrh
zákona hospodářského”) of September 19185. In the summer of 1918,
covert efforts were initiated to develop the political and economic
framework of the future state. The Draft Political Law envisaged
the establishment of central ministries and institutions that essen-
tially replicated the Austrian administration. The rather extensive
Draft Economic Law, with a total of 86 paragraphs, was based on
the real war situation and envisioned a tied economy for some time
after the war. Independent financial management and a separate
currency and the establishment of a central bank (“cedulová banka”)
formed the core of the proposal. The proposal was essentially a sort
of “timetable” for the socio-economic transformation of part of the
former monarchy into a separate entity. Most likely for this reason,
the transition was relatively smooth.
The legislative stability of the new state is evidenced by the fact
that the existing legal order was adopted by the so-called recep-
tion norm (Act No 11/1918 Coll.). Since Austrian (Cisleithanian) law
remained in force in the Czech lands, Hungarian law in Slovakia and
Subcarpathian Rus and German law in the Hlučín region (acquired
from Germany in 1920), it was necessary to unify legislation,

5 O náš hospodářský program. Obzor národohospodářský, 1926, (31), p. 1–38; Laci-

na, V., Formování, p. 62; Jakubec, I. (2011). Ekonomické parametry českosloven-
ské Ústavní listiny. In: Čechurová, J. – Šlehofer, L. et al. Ústava 1920. Vyvrcholení
konstituování československého státu, Praha: Leges, pp. 170–179.

40
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

including that governing the economy. Therefore, a special ministry

was established to unify laws and the organisation of administration.
Newly created laws would apply to the full republic.
The customs and monetary separation from the former monarchy
were an expression of economic independence. On 20 February 1919,
Czechoslovakia was declared an independent customs territory
(Act No 97/1919 Coll.) and five days later monetary separation was
proclaimed (Act No 84/1919 Coll.). As part of the monetary sepa-
ration, half of the currency was to be minted and returned to the
owner, and the other half was to be withdrawn as a forced state loan
at 1% interest. However, less than a third (29%) of the currency was
retained, and in some areas even less. The Czechoslovak koruna,
also known in some cases as the crown, (CZK) became the new
unit of currency, with a ratio of 1:1 to the old koruna (Kubů and
Pátek, 2000).
The subsequent deflationary policy of Finance Minister A. Rašín
and the British loan stabilized the crown for the long term (16 Swiss
centimes). On the other hand, the deflation had a negative impact
on Czechoslovak exports. The post-war economic crisis of 1922–1923,
coupled with the conversion to a peacetime economy, slowed down
the economic recovery. The decline in industrial production in 1922
was 10.4% in Czechoslovakia, but industry in Slovakia was affected
even more, with a decline of about 30% (Kárník, 2000). By 1924
however, industrial production and trade had already surpassed
the pre-war level, and agriculture did so a year later. Stabilization
of the banking sector was brought about by the seven banking laws
of 1924 (No. 235–241/1924 Coll.).

3. The different economic levels between the different parts

of the new state and their share of the economic results

The new state had to deal with the varying (not only) economic levels
of the different parts of the new state. At the time of the establish-
ment of the republic, the Czech lands could rightly be described as
industrial-agrarian, Slovakia as agrarian and under-industrialised,
and Subcarpathian Rus as an explicitly agrarian region. It must be
added, however, that Slovakia (former Upper Hungary), with its

41
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

isolated metallurgical and mining areas, formed the economic core

of Hungary. Thus, the new state consisted of economically differently
developed areas.
As late as the 1921 census of Czechoslovakia, the proportion of the
population dependent (including family members) on agriculture
(39.6%) still outweighed the proportion dependent on industry and
trade (33.4%). This proportion changed slightly in favour of those
dependent on the secondary job sector only in 1930. The Czech lands
maintained their industrialisation led by the monarchy throughout
the interwar period, while the economic importance of Slovakia and
Subcarpathian Rus increased only slowly. After the establishment
of the republic, Slovakia found itself in fierce competition with
Czech enterprises and only from the second half of the 1920s and
during the 1930s did it experience another wave of industrialisa-
tion, mainly connected with preparations for the defence of the
republic (construction of strategic railways and military industry
enterprises). The table below shows the structure by country.

Table 2
Structure of the population of Czechoslovakia
(including family members) by sector in %

Primary Secondary Tertiary

Year Total
sector sector sector
Czecho­slovakia

1921 39.6 33.4 27 100.0

1930 34.6 34.9 30.5 100.0

Czech lands

1921 31.6 39.6 28.8 100.0

1930 25.6 41.5 32.9 100.0

42
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

Primary Secondary Tertiary

Year Total
sector sector sector

1921 60.6 17.4 22.0 100.0

Slovakia

1930 56.8 19.1 24.1 100.0

Sub­carpathian Rus

1921 67.6 10.4 22.0 100.0

1930 66.3 11.9 21.8 100.0

Source: Statistisches Jahrbuch der Čechoslovakischen Republik (1938). Prag: Státní úřad
statistický, p. 15.

4. Elimination of transport “handicaps” of the new state

by peace treaties

The peace treaties guaranteed Czechoslovakia not only political

but also economic and transport independence (internationali-
sation of the Elbe, Danube and Oder rivers; representation in the
International Commission for the Elbe, Danube and Oder rivers;
cession of part of the fleet with navigation facilities on these rivers;
the right to establish a free zone in Hamburg and Szczecin; the right
to register naval ships; passage of Czechoslovak trains to Trieste
with the monarchy-era tariff; freedom of transit, etc.)6. However,
only part of the Czechoslovak claim in German ports was realized.
The lease zones were not agreed upon until 1929, with a term of 99
years, therefore lasting until 20287. In Hamburg, only the inland

6 No. 217/1921, 507/1921, 102/1922 Sb. z. a n.

7 Ujednání o nájemním pásmu československém v přístavě hamburském (Roz­
hod­nutí). Zahraniční politika, 1929, vol. II, pp. 1542–1543.

43
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

zone (not the maritime zone) was realized, and only the transfer
from smaller naval vessels to the Elbe barges or railways was carried
out (Jakubec, 2016). The most important Czechoslovak company on
the Elbe became the Czechoslovak Navigation Joint Stock Company
of Elbe (“Československá plavební akciová společnost labská”).
Sensitive commodities, including arms production, were routed
through Hamburg. In the early 1930s, about 20% of Czechoslovak
exports on the Elbe were routed through the Czechoslovak tenant
zone in Hamburg and between 11.3–17% in imports8. Most goods were
routed through other parts of the Freeport. In Szczecin, a separate
zone was not built and the Czechoslovak Navigation Joint Stock
Company of the Oder only concluded a lease agreement for the use
of a part of the port (Jakubec, 2016). The recovery of transport condi-
tions in Central Europe did not progress very quickly, however9. In
addition, throughout the interwar period, the main load directions
were reoriented from the north-south direction to the west-east
direction. Approximately 360 km of new lines and about 450 km of
main roads were built in the interwar period10.

5. Czechoslovakia was born a debtor

The newly created state was forced to assume a proportionate

part of the debt responsibility of the former monarchy. Under the
Treaty of Sainte-Germain and the Treaty of Trianon, Czechoslovakia
assumed part of the pre-war state debts of Austria and Hungary
(secured and unsecured) and part of their payment obligations.
Voluntarily, Czechoslovakia also assumed part of the monarchy’s
war debts. The Reparation Commission set the share of the pre-war

8 Data for other years are not available. Staatsarchiv Hamburg, 371–8II Deputa-
tion für Handel, Schiffahrt und Gewerbe II, S I H 1.9.5., inv. no. 2 and 4; NA, fund
MPOŽ, cart. 2489, no. 51784/31, Czechoslovak port zone in Hamburg – statistical
reports.
9 AMZV ČR, IV. section, cart. 205, folder 1, no. 13417/20, Mèmoire relatif à la crise
des transports en Europe centrale et sa solution z 29. listopadu 1920, Praha 4. 12.
1920.
10 NA, fund MŽ, cart. 810, no. 30771/29, Železniční investiční činnost stavební
v zemi Slovenské v letech 1934–1937; Míša, K., Dálková silnice Brno – Žilina. SiI-
niční obzor, 1938, 4 (17), pp. 67–72.

44
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

unsecured Austrian debt at 41.7%, and the share of the unsecured

Hungarian debt at approximately 16–17%, i.e., 29.7% of the monar-
chy’s unsecured debt in total, 33.9% in real terms (CZK 5.59 billion).
Of the secured Austrian and Hungarian debts, Czechoslovakia took
over 47.5% (CZK 2.18 billion). It also included war loans and supplies
(CZK 5.63 billion).
These liabilities, totalling CZK 13.40 billion in the new currency
(excluding interest), constituted a substantial part of the national
debt. This amount was eventually halved by the Hague Reparations
Commission to CZK 6.342 billion. In addition, the costs of the
Czechoslovak legions (armaments, supplies, repatriation) of about
CZK 8 billion and the so-called liberation fee (about CZK 5 billion)
must be added. Thus, the total amounted to about CZK 26 billion,
after a reduction of about CZK 20 billion11. From 1930, according
to the Hague Commission, the Czechoslovak Republic was to pay
reparations of CZK 10 million (Procházka, 1930). After the Hoover
Moratorium of 1931 and the Lausanne Conference, reparation
payments were cut except for the costs of the Czechoslovak Legion
and the so-called liberation fee.

6. Economic policy and its foreign policy implications

Economic policy in interwar Czechoslovakia was influenced mainly

by two main groups. Initially, the economic interest group around
the most essential Czechoslovak bank (“Živnostenská banka”),
gained a decisive position, being politically linked to the numeri-
cally small but significantly strong national democracy, and backed
by the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Industry, Trade and
Trades, business organisations and professional economic institutions
(e.g. the Central Union of Czechoslovak Industrialists, the Union
of Czechoslovak Banks and the Chamber of Commerce and Trades
in Prague). Notable representatives include J. Preiss, the long-time
chief director of the bank, and the Minister of Finances, A. Rašín.

11 Podrobněji Červený, P. (2002). Osud rakousko-uherských státních dluhů a závaz­

ků po roce 1918. Ekonomická revue, 3(5), pp. 15–16; Deset let Československé republiky
(1928), vol. 2, Praha: Státní úřad statistický, pp. 119–121.

45
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

The second group was centred around the Agrarian Party and
agrarian economic circles (the Agrarian Bank – “Agrární banka”).
This group gained importance from the mid-twenties onwards in
connection with the implementation of land reform, as evidenced
by the election results (Lacina, 1994). Although Czechoslovakia was
an industrial-agrarian state, its economic policy from the mid-1920s
onwards was influenced by the Agrarian Party with its long-time
Prime Minister A. Švehla, which led to a preference for agricul-
tural or agro-industrial interests over industrial ones, including in
foreign trade relations. This “agrarian” economic policy undoubtedly
affected trade relations with neighbouring Poland and Hungary and
did not help relations with the Balkan agrarian and agro­‑industrial
states.
In Central Europe, Czechoslovakia failed to realise a natural
exchange of its industrial production for agrarian products with its
close (Poland, Hungary) and more distant Balkan neighbours. Apart
from economic reasons, relations were also limited by poli­tical consid-
erations or efforts to revise peace treaties. Even attempts to intensify
economic cooperation in the mid-1930s within the framework of
the Little Agreement (“Malá dohoda”) failed. The Little Agreement
was economically dismantled by Germany. Czechoslovakia lost its
“struggle” for the Balkans (Jančík, 1990).
In the first post-war years, agreement capital flowed into Czecho­
slovakia, but its importance was not proportional to its political
ties. Both the government and economic circles were interested in
it, with the aim of involving this capital in the fate of the republic
and helping the overall modernisation of industry and other areas.
Among the most important were the French shareholding in the Škoda
plants (“Škodovy závody” – Pilsen) and the Mining and Metallurgical
Company (“Báňská a hutní společnost” – Prague), the British share-
holding in the Anglo-Czechoslovak Bank for Trade and Industry
(“Anglo-československá banka pro obchod a průmysl” – Prague), as
well as in the consolidation of the Czechoslovak currency and econ-
omy in 1922 (Czecholoan), and loans to a number of cities (Prague,
Bratislava, Brno, Karlovy Vary). As of 31 December 1937, British direct
capital holdings accounted for 30.8%, French 21.4%, Austrian 31.1%,
Dutch 8.8%, German 7.2%, Belgian 7.1%, Swiss 4.5%, American 3.5%,

46
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

Italian 2.2%, Swedish 0.9% and Hungarian 0.5% of foreign holdings

(Teichová, 1994).
However, Germany became the foreign economic partner from the
mid-1920s onwards (as it was before 1918), which did not correspond
to Czechoslovakia’s foreign policy and military-strategic ties. The
explanation lies in geographical proximity, regional specialization,
existing economic ties, the transit of Czechoslovak foreign trade via
German railways, waterways and seaports, and mutual economic
ties12. Germany only considered using its transport and economic
superiority in the context of the “preparations” for Munich13.
The consolidation of the economy after the war was to be aided
by the so-called nostrification. Law No. 12/1920 Coll., announced
in the above-mentioned Draft Economic Law, reflected the fact that
the key positions in the economy of the new state remained in the
hands of the German and Austrian capital even after the estab-
lishment of the state. Furthermore, the most important companies
and banks, whose operations were located in the territory of the
Czechoslovak Republic, had their formal administrative headquar-
ters in Vienna and Budapest. The Nostrification Act empowered the
relevant ministers (of industry, trade and commerce, finance, and
railways) to call on enterprises to transfer their headquarters to
the Republic. Joint stock companies and limited liability companies
were subject to nostrification. In reality, nostrification could only be
implemented after the conclusion of the agreement with Austria at
the end of August 1920 and with Hungary even seven years later14.
In total, 235 companies were nostrified, of which 231 are known in
detail (Čižinský, 2016). The capital of these companies represented

12 Überlegungen zum deutsch-tschechoslowakischen Verhältnis, Gebsattel, Prag,

30. Oktober 1918. In Deutsche Gesandschaftsberichte aus Prag. Innenpolitik und Min-
derheitsprobleme in der Ersten Tschechoslowakischen Republik. (1983). Teil I. Mün-
chen–Wien: Oldenbourg, Dokument Nr. A8, pp. 563–564.
13 Aufzeichnung des Leiters der Wirtschaftspolitischen Abteilung, Wiehl, Berlín 3.
9. 1938. Akten zur deutschen auswärtigen Politik 1918–1945. (1950), series D (1937–
1945), Bd. II, Baden-Baden: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Dok. Nr. 427, pp. 550–553.
14 Kolize, řevnivost a pragmatismus: československo-rakouské hospodářské vztahy
1918–1938. (1999). Praha: Karolinum; Tóth, A. (2015). Maďarsko ve dvacátých
letech 20. století: „bethlenovská“ konsolidace nového státu a československo-maďar-
ské hospodářsko-politické vztahy. Praha: Oeconomica.

47
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

about one-third of the industrial and commercial capital. At the

same time, these enterprises paid one-fifth of their taxes in their
seats outside the Republic. Nostrification was also carried out in the
banking and insurance sectors. Details are given in the table below.

Table 3
Nostrification of Joint Stock Companies (1928)

Share Share Total

Relocating Dividing
Head­ capital of capital of number of Total share
head- head-
quarters relocated divided nostrified capital
quarters quarters
companies companies companies

Austria 118 983.0 44 456.6 162 1 437.6

Hungary 62 463.8 7 47.0 69 510.8

Total 180 1 556.8 51 501.6 231 1 948.4

Source: Deset let Československé republiky (1928). vol. 2. Praha: Státní úřad statistický,
p. 147.

It should also be mentioned that the nostrification process was also

accompanied by the repatriation (transfer from abroad) of the capital
of companies located in Vienna and Budapest. At that time, Czech
banks bought a large part of the shares of Czechoslovak companies
and subsequently sold them to their clients.

7. Foreign Trade (“Made in Czechoslovakia”)

Due to the capacity of Czechoslovak industry and the lack of raw

materials, foreign trade played an important role in the Czechoslovak
economy. Important raw materials included wool, cotton, and iron ore.
Some foods and basic goods were also imported, as Czechoslovakia
only had enough wood, coal and linseed.

48
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

Among the weaknesses of Czechoslovak goods sales was their

structure or too wide production range and distribution. Apart
from engineering products (arms exports) and equipment for sugar
factories and electrical engineering, key industries such as textiles,
footwear, glass, jewellery from Jablonec and Nisou, porcelain, musi-
cal instruments, wooden toys, i.e., generally light industry, which
in case of economic fluctuations experienced the greatest losses as
surplus goods. Moreover, the light export industry was located in
areas with a majority German population.
Inspecting the structure of Czechoslovak exports by commodity
(Brussels Convention), a reduction by two-thirds in food and bever-
ages in the period 1920–1937 can be seen along with a substantial
increase in the share of raw materials and semi-finished products,
but with several fluctuations and a small increase in finished products.

Table 4
Commodity structure of Czechoslovak exports in 1920–1937 in %

Commodity 1920 1924 1929 1933 1937

Live animals 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0

Food and drink 22.0 18.7 11.4 7.8 8.2

Raw materials
and semi­‑finished 12.4 21.8 16.8 22.9 19.8
products

Finished products 65.6 59.2 71.5 69.1 71.8

Unwrought gold
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2
and silver

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Source: Zahraniční obchod Republiky československé v roce 1937 (1938). vol. I. Obchod
speciální (část prvá). Československá statistika, vol. 154, Praha: Státní úřad stati-
stický, p. 10*.

49
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

The structure of Czechoslovak imports in the years 1920–1937 was

characterised by a significant increase in the share of imports of
raw materials and semi-finished products to less than 60%. After
fluctuations, the share of finished products stabilised below 30%.
The share of foodstuffs fell to almost half.

Table 5
Commodity structure of Czechoslovak import in 1920–1937 in %

Commodity 1920 1924 1929 1933 1937

Live animals 0.6 5.2 4.8 1.8 1.9

Food and drink 18.2 25.1 14.6 19.2 11.0

Raw materials
and semi­
45.1 48.1 49.0 49.9 57.5
‑finished
products

Finished
36.1 21.6 31.5 28.6 29.6
products

Unwrought
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.0
gold and silver

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Source: Zahraniční obchod Republiky československé v roce 1937 (1938). vol. I. Obchod
speciální (část prvá). Československá statistika, vol. 154, Praha: Státní úřad stati-
stický, p. 10*.

The territorial orientation of Czechoslovak exports and imports shows

a relatively interesting development. Throughout the interwar period,
Europe remained in the lead, although in the case of exports, there
was a roughly 20% decline (from 95.53% in 1921 to 74.11% in 1937) and
in the case of imports, after a significant fluctuation in 1928, a return
to the level of the early 1920s (69.13% in 1937). After the crisis, the
increase in exports from the American continent (North and South)

50
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

is surprising (from 3.58% in 1921 to 14.27% in 1937). After the crisis,

imports from the Americas also strengthened by 15.27%. Overall, Asia
became stronger, as did Africa.
The problem for Czechoslovak foreign trade was re-exportation.
The clues are both official statistics and contemporary statements,
including memoirs. Before 1929, for example, the trade destination
Hamburg (i.e., Freihafen Hamburg) accounted for as much of the
turnover of goods as Germany itself, and goods necessarily had to
go to other destinations (Kubů and Jakubec, 1992). Intermediaries
calculated several to tens of per cent margins15 without specifying
the destination to which the goods were going or under which brand
name (Kubů and Jakubec, 1992). The acceleration of the elimination
of intermediaries was realised during the Great Depression, when
direct contacts were made with buyers, mostly at ports.
Re-importation was also an issue for Czechoslovakia. However,
it was mostly identifiable in crops that did not come from those
countries (cocoa, tea, coffee, spices, rice, tobacco, cotton, jute, rubber,
etc.). Positive trends leading to its reduction were successful during
the Great Depression.

Table 6
Value of re-exported goods as a percentage of the
value of total imports from these countries

Country 1924 1934

Italy 53.0 1.2

Germany 43.2 1.9

Netherlands 43.1 9.7

15 U formy Melichar-Umrath dokonce 30–50%. Novotný, J.–Šouša, J. (1989). Úsilí če-

ských výrobců zemědělských strojů o proniknutí na brazilský trh ve dvacátých
letech (Akce firmy Melichar-Umrath). In: Latinská Amerika – dějiny a současnost,
vol. 2, Praha, p. 192.

51
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

Country 1924 1934

Portugal 36.7 0.2

Great Britain 10.7 8.0

Austria 7.3 0.5

Switzerland 6.0 3.5

France 1.4 0.9

Source: Jakubec, I., Kubů, E. (1994). Veränderung der territorialen Orientierung des
tschechoslowakischen Aussenhandels zwischen den Weltkriegen. In Teichová, A.–
Mosser, A. –Pátek, J. (Hrsg.). Der Markt im Mitteleuropa der Zwischenkriegszeit, Prag:
Karolinum, p. 282.

About one-third of Czechoslovak foreign trade was carried out in

the successor states, the other third in Germany16, including the
seaports of Hamburg and Bremen. Great Britain accounted for 4%
of Czechoslovak exports and 6% of imports in the late 1930s, while
exports and imports from France accounted for about 9% and 6%
respectively.
During the Great Depression, the weight of traditional markets
in Central and Southeastern Europe, including Germany, declined.
While Germany’s share of Czechoslovak foreign trade fell from
more than 22% (1929) to less than 15% (1937), the share of Western
European industrial countries, Scandinavia and especially overseas
countries (USA, Brazil, Argentina, Egypt and India) increased. Trade
with the advanced Western European economies encouraged the
production of quality competitive products and reduced dependence

16 Hospodářské vztahy sledovalo britské ministerstvo zahraničí. Srv. např. The

National Archives Kew, FO 371/21759, Political Central Germany, C 4569/3500/18,
Protocol extending German-Czechoslovak Clearing Agreement, 10th November
1937, to Austria; C 5764/3500/18, German-Czechoslovak Clearing Agreement,
C 5882/3500/18, Geman-Czechoslovak negotians regarding exchange of go-
ods; C 6561/3500/18, German-Czechoslovak comercial teraty; C 10412/3500/18
German­‑Czechoslovak comercial relations; C 10431/3500/18 German-Czechoslo-
vak relations.

52
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

on the clearing system. Clearing was advantageous for Germany,

Austria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy,
Turkey, Latvia, and Estonia. Its share in Czechoslovak imports and
exports reached a peak in 1934 (91% imports, 82% exports). By 1936 its
share had fallen to 65% (imports) and 57% (exports) (Kubů and Pátek,
2000). The disadvantageous clearing system for Czechoslovakia
motivated the search for other, albeit distant, outlets, especially
with free foreign exchange. More detailed data on foreign trade
are given in the tables below.

Table 7
Share of selected countries in Czechoslovakia’s
exports in 1920–1937 in %

DE AT HU RO PL YU IT FR GB USA

1920 12.08 35.10 9.11 2.66 5.17 3.92 4.72 8.61 2.95 1.98

1921 11.21 28.69 11.23 4.31 5.21 7.35 3.37 4.82 7.70 2.82

1922 18.84 21.95 8.78 2.89 3.34 4.33 3.67 4.80 7.44 5.15

1923 25.42 20.99 5.68 3.22 2.85 4.36 4.10 2.41 9.70 4.43

1924 24.23 20.68 6.66 4.67 3.28 4.87 5.77 1.71 9.31 4.22

1925 28.29 17.28 6.26 4.51 3.50 4.36 4.81 1.43 8.16 4.02

1926 26.67 16.26 6.88 4.67 2.04 5.40 4.75 1.42 8.63 4.73

1927 28.40 15.2 8.1 4.5 3.3 4.6 3.7 1.2 7.6 5.0

1928 26.89 14.7 6.9 4.1 4.1 4.5 3.8 1.3 7.0 5.5

1929 22.90 15.0 6.4 3.8 4.4 5.6 3.8 1.6 6.9 7.2

53
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

DE AT HU RO PL YU IT FR GB USA

1930 20.4 14.0 5.8 3.4 3.7 8.7 3.8 2.3 7.9 5.6

1931 19.0 13.7 2.2 2.6 3.0 6.3 3.4 3.6 10.3 6.1

1932 19.6 13.9 2.7 4.1 2.5 5.5 3.4 5.0 5.5 6.8

1933 19.8 12.2 3.2 3.7 2.8 3.3 3.2 5.6 6.1 7.2

1934 22.2 10.6 2.1 3.7 2.0 3.5 3.2 4.1 6.4 6.8

1935 15.4 9.5 1.8 4.8 3.3 4.0 2.9 4.0 6.9 7.7

1936 15.3 8.9 2.0 4.7 2.1 5.3 1.4 4.3 9.0 9.1

1937 15.0 7.3 1.9 5.4 2.6 5.0 3.4 3.8 8.7 9.3

Source: Československá statistika (1920–1938) (1920–1938). Series III, Praha: Státní

úřad statistický.

Table 8
Share of selected countries in Czechoslovakia’s
imports in 1920–1937 in %

DE AT HU RO PL YU IT FR GB USA

1920 23.96 13.01 2.80 1.32 1.71 1.45 4.29 4.09 4.32 17.58

1921 26.13 8.84 4.12 2.15 1.71 1.64 3.27 2.85 5.98 20.27

1922 27.85 7.77 5.39 3.39 2.56 2.11 2.33 3.50 5.14 18.01

1923 43.91 6.52 3.45 1.82 3.68 2.72 7.58 3.46 3.29 6.99

54
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

DE AT HU RO PL YU IT FR GB USA

1924 40.59 7.84 5.55 2.95 4.56 2.63 9.22 3.38 2.83 5.61

1925 40.53 7.36 6.36 2.09 7.03 2.85 6.75 3.93 3.71 6.35

1926 36.89 7.40 6.73 3.15 7.18 3.82 4.65 4.43 3.96 5.01

1927 36.40 7.1 5.4 3.7 5.9 3.3 3.6 4.4 4.5 6.9

1928 38.70 7.5 4.4 2.8 6.6 2.3 3.3 4.3 4.3 6.0

1929 38.40 7.8 4.8 2.4 6.5 1.7 3.6 3.8 4.1 5.5

1930 38.3 7.7 5.9 3.6 5.6 2.8 3.3 3.6 3.7 5.0

1931 40.6 7.2 1.1 4.8 5.3 3.3 3.9 3.8 3.7 4.1

1932 35.2 5.6 1.5 4.1 4.6 4.8 3.7 3.9 4.1 11.4

1933 28.9 4.9 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.8 4.9 6.2 4.6 7.6

1934 2.67 5.1 2.0 2.9 3.7 3.1 4.1 6.4 5.2 5.5

1935 22.8 4.6 2.0 3.9 3.7 5.4 3.6 5.6 5.4 5.9

1936 23.2 4.5 1.8 4.6 2.8 4.4 1.2 6.0 6.0 6.1

1937 17.3 4.2 1.5 4.8 2.5 3.7 2.4 5.3 6.3 8.7

Source: Československá statistika (1920–1938) (1920–1938). Series III, Praha: Státní

úřad statistický.

Czechoslovakia succeeded in establishing itself on European and

world markets and in joining the international division of labour.
While in the 1920s about 20% of the national income went through

55
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

foreign trade, before 1929 it was already about 30% (Kubů and Pátek,
2000; Skřivan, 2007). This was not exceptional, as other European
countries such as Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands
were similarly involved. However, many Czechoslovak industries
were directly linked to foreign sales.
Czechoslovak foreign trade, through exports to less demanding
markets of consumer and engineering goods, raw materials (lignite,
wood) and semi-finished products, and imports of raw materials (ore,
cotton, linen) and technology-intensive goods, exhibited features of
both advanced and less advanced economies (Kubů and Pátek, 2000).

8. The “Golden” Twenties and the Great Depression

Although the German population was not enthusiastic about the

changes in state law after 191817, a common ground was found between
Czech and German businessmen in the first half of the year. In
1928, the German Deutscher Hauptverband der Industrie in der
Tschechoslowakei became part of the Central Union of Czechoslovak
Industrialists (Boyer, 1999). The situation began to change only with
the rise of A. Hitler, his propaganda and the economic crisis.
In order to understand some of the government’s actions after
World War I (nostrification, repatriation of capital, land reform,
etc.), it is necessary to bear in mind the capital dominance of
Czechoslovak Germans (and Hungarians in Slovakia) in the industrial
sector. National economist Jiří Hejda estimated the share of indus-
try in the hands of Czechs and Slovaks in 1927 at 40%, adding: “For
whether the industry is Czech or German: it must first and foremost
be Czechoslovak.” („Neboť ať je průmysl český nebo německý: v prvé
řadě musí být československý.”) (Hejda, 1927, p. 118)18. That is, work
for the republic regardless of ethnicity. In “Czech” (Czechoslovak)
hands, according to J. Hejda, was the production of aeroplanes,

17 Zástupci německých stran vstoupili do vlády až v roce 1926 a poslední dva

němečtí ministři opustili vládu v březnu 1938 (F. Spina a E. Zajicek).
18 See also: Průcha V. a kol. (2004). Hospodářské a sociální dějiny Československa 1918–
1992. Vol 1: období 1918–1945, Brno: Doplněk, p. 114; Mitchell, B. R. (1981). Europe-
an Historical Statistics 1750–1975. Second Revised edition, London: Macmillan,
pp. 819–826.

56
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

most of the production of weapons and cars, agricultural machin-

ery, explosives and pharmaceuticals, the production of bricks and
ceramics, shoes, food products, beer production, dairy products.
The development of industry was influenced by several elements
inherited from the monarchy – the structure, the technical level,
the low level of specialisation and the consequences of war produc-
tion. Small batch or piece production was a characteristic feature of
medium and small enterprises. The conversion to peacetime produc-
tion was hampered and slowed by shortages of raw materials, fuel
and low labour discipline, which persisted from the war as a sign of
resistance.
The literature refers to the brief period after the post-war crisis
of 1924–1929 as the “golden” twenties. The overall growth rate of
Czechoslovakia’s gross domestic product in the 1920s was slightly
above the European average (2.6%)19. The most important sectors
of Czechoslovak industry included textiles, metallurgy, engineer-
ing, food (sugar, distilling, brewing), energy, chemicals, glass, foot-
wear, clothing and wood. However, the different sectors developed
differently. The fastest-growing sectors were footwear, chemicals,
electricity, cement and paper.
The Great Depression of 1929–1933 and its course in Czechoslovakia,
although corresponding to that of other countries, was charac-
terised by several specific features. First of all, it began belatedly
in the spring of 1930, when the investment wave was catching up,
but it lasted longer and was very deep. The decline in production
was as much as 40%. In 1931, the credit and currency crises joined
in. Among the most affected industries were metallurgy, export­
‑oriented light industry (sugar, textiles, porcelain, glass, wood) and
the metal industry (engineering and other branches). The electricity,
chemical and some food industries were less affected. In the border
areas with a predominantly German population and in Slovakia, the
decline in industrial production was relatively greater.
The consequences of the crisis were ambivalent. On one hand,
production was curtailed, the credit and monetary system was
disrupted, and foreign trade was affected; on the other hand, the

19 Statistická ročenka Protektorátu Čechy a Morava 1942 (1942). Praha, p. 240.

57
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

crisis regulated supply and demand, accelerated the reduction of

production costs and structural changes in production and promoted
new technical solutions. Even the crisis did not stop electrification
and investment (military-strategic) actions in transport infrastruc-
ture. Among other things, the construction of Czechoslovak fortifi-
cations and the building of strategic roads and railways contributed
to the recovery in the second half of the 1930s. In agriculture, the
crisis led to a decline in prices and incomes.
Before the crisis, the Czechoslovak economy already showed a high
degree of cartelization, which was accelerated during the crisis by
state intervention (syndicalization of non-cartelised industries).
Czechoslovak cartels also participated in major international cartels.
While participation in the cartel was limited in terms of volume,
territory or otherwise, it also expressed respect for Czechoslovak
industrial potential and access to licences and new technologies.
The iron and steel industry became the most concentrated industry
in Czechoslovakia and internationally.
During the Great Depression, the role of the export industry of
a consumer nature was weakened and, on the contrary, the heavy
industry (metallurgy, engineering, chemistry) was strengthened,
reinforced by preparations for defence, followed by the energy,
textile, paper and printing industries. The proportion of heavy
industry compared with light industry rose from 36.7:63.3 in 1924
to 45.1:54.9 in 1937, as shown in the table below.

Table 9
Structure of industrial production by sector in 1924–1937 in %

Industry 1924 1929 1937

Mining industry 12.6 11.0 10.5

Generation of electricity 1.5 2.0 2.9

Metallurgy and engineering 17.9 23.0 25.3

58
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

Chemistry 4.7 5.0 6.4

Heavy industry total 36.7 41.0 45.1

Textiles 23.9 21.0 21.5

Light industry total 63.3 59.0 54.9

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Kubů, E.–Pátek, J. (eds.) (2000). Mýtus a realita hospodářské vyspělosti

Československa mezi světovými válkami. Praha: Karolinum, p. 98; Teichova, A. (1972).
A Structural and Institutional Change in the Czechoslovak Economy 1918–1938. Papers in
East European Economics, 1972, no. 6; Teichová, A. (1988). Wirtschaftsgeschichte der
Tschechoslowakei 1918–1980. Wien: Böhlau, p. 37; Pátek, J. (1995). Možnosti a hrani­ce
rozvoje ekonomicky v meziválečném Československu a úloha hospodářského
managementu. Soudobé dějiny, 2–3(2), p. 206.

Despite some progress, especially in the 1930s (building the second

military arms base of the state), economic differences between the
Czech lands and Slovakia and Subcarpathian Russia persisted. In
Slovakia, food, metal and wood industries prevailed. During the
interwar period, the importance of industry continued to grow, and in
1937 its share of national income in Czechoslovakia reached CZK 23.7
billion, or about 35% (Kubů and Pátek, 2000).

9. Czechoslovakia’s economic place in Europe and the world

Czechoslovakia appeared to be an industrial state in comparison with

the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, but not in compar-
ison with the advanced economies. According to C. Clark’s calculations,
the national income in 1925–1934 averaged USD 2.815 million (similar
to the Netherlands, and Australia, with $455 per capita and being on
par with Austria and Greece.[39]) Czechoslovakia was therefore at
the forefront of the economically moderately developed countries
or the edge of the industrial core of Europe.

59
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

In terms of per capita national income, Czechoslovakia ranked 17th

in the world. However, we must remember in this context that the
Czech lands accounted for most of the national income. According
to the value of industrial production per capita, Czechoslovakia
ranked 12th in the world, and even 10th in the world (1.7%). More
detailed information about Czechoslovakia’s position in Europe and
the world is provided by the data on the mining of stone and lignite,
the production of iron ingots and alloys, the production of steel and
artificial silk, published in the Yearbooks of the League of Nations.

Table 10
Overview of selected indicators comparing
Czechoslovakia with the European and world scale

# in Europe / # in Europe /
1928 1937
World World

Hard coal mining 14 568 000 t 6. /11. 16 951 000 t 6./9.

Lignite mining 20 444 000 t 2. /2. 18 042 000 t 2./2.

Manufacture of
ferrous ingots 1 569 000 t 7. /9. 1 675 000 t 6./9.
and iron alloys

Steel production 1 973 000 t 7. /9. 2 315 000 t 6./8.

Production of
1 705 t 9. /11. 4 242 t 9./13.
artificial silk

Source: Annuaire Statistique de la Société des Nations 1937/38/ Statistical Year-Book

1937/38 (1938). Genève/ Geneva: Société des Nations/ League of Nations. Service
d’Études Économiques/ Economic Intelligence Service.

60
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

***
Due to its scope, this text focuses only on selected areas of the inter-
war economy and its limits. Much attention was paid to industry,
which formed the basis of the Czechoslovak economy, and to foreign
trade, a crucial part of the economy. At the same time, the paper
was unable to address other strengths and weaknesses of the
Czechoslovak economy (quality and reliability of products, general
and vocational education, science and research, unfinished modifi-
cation of the Czechoslovak transport network, insufficient measures
to mitigate the effects of the crisis in the German-majority border
areas, cooperation within the framework of the Little Agreement,
etc.). Agriculture and land reform, the banking sector, and others
were also left out of the interpretation.
Czechoslovakia did not replace the importance of Vienna in terms
of the stock exchange and insurance or Berlin’s position in terms of
economics and transportation and failed to establish a lasting
presence in the Balkans. At the same time, it can be stated that
Czechoslovakia demonstrated its economic viability during its
historically defined existence,but did not become a destabiliser of
the Central European or European economies.

References

Unpublished sources

Archiv Ministerstva zahraničních věcí České republiky, Praha, IV. section.

Národní archiv, fund Ministerstvo železnic
fund Ministerstvo průmyslu, obchodu a živností
Staatsarchiv Hamburg, 371–8II Deputation für Handel, Schiffahrt und
Gewerbe II
The National Archives Kew, FO 371/21759

Published sources
Akten zur deutschen auswärtigen Politik 1918–1945. (1950), Serie D
(1937–1945), Bd. II, Baden-Baden: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Annuaire Statistique de la Société des Nations 1937/38/ Statistical Year­‑Book
1937/38 (1938). Genève/ Geneva: Société des Nations/ League of Na-
tions. Service d´ Études Économiques/ Economic Intelligence Service.

61
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

Bíbl, F. (1927). Odhad předválečného národního jmění zemí nynější

republiky Československé podle postupu prof. Dr. F. Fellnera.
Československý statistický věstník, 1927, (8), 35–51, 313–334, 422–430.
Československá statistika (1920–1938) (1920–1938). Series III, Praha:
Státní úřad statistický.
Deset let Československé republiky (1928). vol. 2. Praha: Státní úřad
statistický.
Deutsche Gesandschaftsberichte aus Prag. Innenpolitik und Minder­
heitsprobleme in der Ersten Tschechoslowakischen Republik. (1983).
Teil I. München–Wien: Oldenbourg.
O náš hospodářský program. Obzor národohospodářský, 1926, (31), 1–38.
Mitchell, B. R. (1981). European Historical Statistics 1750–1975. Second
Revised edition, London: Macmillan.
Moderní stát, 1930.
Přítomnost, 1927.
Sbírka zákonů a nařízení ČSR 1921, 1922, Praha 1921, 1922.
Statistická ročenka Protektorátu Čechy a Morava 1942 (1942). Praha.
Statistisches Jahrbuch der Čechoslovakischen Republik (1938). Prag: Státní
úřad statistický.
Zahraniční obchod Republiky československé v roce 1937 (1938). vol. I.
Obchod speciální (část prvá). Československá statistika, vol. 154,
Praha: Státní úřad statistický.
Zahraniční politika, 1929.

References

Boyer, Ch. (1999). Deutschen in der Industrieverbänden der Ersten

Republik. In: Barth, B., Faltus, J., Křen, J., Kubů, E. Konkur­
renzpartnerschaft. Die deutsche und die tschechoslowakische Wirtschaft
in der Zwisechenkriegszeit. Essen: Klartext, 168–183.
Červený, P. (2002). Osud rakousko-uherských státních dluhů a závaz-
ků po roce 1918. Ekonomická revue, 3 (5), 4–18.
Dejmek, J. et al. (2018). Československo. Dějiny státu. Praha: Libri.
Good, D. F. (1986). Der wirtschaftliche Aufstieg des Habsburgerreiches
1750–1914, Wien – Köln – Graz: Böhlau.
Hallon, L. (1995). Industrializácia Slovenska 1918–1938: (rozvoj alebo
úpadok?). Bratislava: Veda.

62
Ivan Jakubec Strengths and Weaknesses of the Economy…

Jakubec, I. (2011). Ekonomické parametry československé Ústavní

listiny. In: Čechurová, J., Šlehofer, L. et al. Ústava 1920. Vyvrcholení
konstituování československého státu, Praha: Leges, 170–179.
Jakubec, I., Kubů, E. (1994). Veränderung der territorialen Orien­
tierung des tschechoslowakischen Aussenhandels zwischen den
Weltkriegen. In: Teichová, A., Mosser, A., Pátek, J. (Hrsg.). Der Markt
im Mitteleuropa der Zwischenkriegszeit, Praha: Karolinum, 257–293.
Jančík, D. (1990). Německo a Malá dohoda: hospodářské proni­kání Ně­
mecka do Jugoslávie a Rumunska v první polovině 30. let. Praha: Uni-
verzita Karlova.
Jančík, D. (1999). Třetí říše a rozklad Malé dohody: hospodářství a diplo­
macie v Podunají v letech 1936–1939. Praha: Karolinum.
Jindra, J. (1998). Výchozí ekonomické pozice Československa. In:
Střední a východní Evropa v krizi XX. století. K 70. narozeninám Zdeňka
Sládka, Praha: Karolinum, 183–202.
Kárník, Z. (2018). České země v éře První republiky, 2. edition. 3 vols.
Praha: Libri.
Kolize, řevnivost a pragmatismus: československo-rakouské hospodářské
vztahy 1918–1938. (1999). Praha: Karolinum.
Kubů, E., Jakubec, I. (1992). Hamburk a jeho úloha v československém
zahraničním obchodu meziválečného období. Hospodářské dějiny /
Economic History, 20, Praha, 127–166.
Kubů, E., Pátek, J. (eds.) (2000). Mýtus a realita hospodářské vyspělosti
Československa mezi světovými válkami. Praha: Karolinum.
Lacina, V. (1990). Formování československé ekonomiky 1918–1923. Praha:
Academie.
Lacina, V. (1996). Dynamika průmyslového rozvoje v meziválečném
Československu. Český časopis historický, 1996, 2(94), 281–302.
Lacina, V. Slezák, L. (1994). Státní hospodářská politika v ekonomickém
vývoji první ČSR. Praha: Historický ústav.
Novotný, J., Šouša, J. (1989). Úsilí českých výrobců zemědělských
strojů o proniknutí na brazilský trh ve dvacátých letech (Akce
firmy Melichar-Umrath). In Latinská Amerika – dějiny a současnost,
vol. 2, Praha, 181–201.
Pátek, J. (1995). Možnosti a hranice rozvoje ekonomicky v mezi­vá­
lečném Československu a úloha hospodářského managementu.
Soudobé dějiny, 1995, 2–3(2), 201–224.

63
Trimarium No. 2 (2/2023) History

Průcha, V. et al. (2004–2009). Hospodářské a sociální dějiny Česko­

slovenska 1918–1992. 2 vols. Brno: Doplněk.
Sandgruber, R. (1978). Wirtschaftswachstum, Energie und Verkehr
in Österreich 1840–1913. In: Kellenbenz, H. (Hg.). Wirtschaftliches
Wachstum, Energie und Verkehr vom Mittelalter bis ins 19. Jahrhundert.
Bericht über die 6. Arbeitstagung der Gesellschaft für Sozial- und
Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Stuttgart–New York: Gustav Fischer, 67–93.
Schelle, K., Tauchen, J. (eds.) (2015–2023). Encyklopedie českých právních
dějin, 22 vols., Praha–Ostrava: Aleš Čeněk.
Skřivan, A. (2007). K charakteru, rozsahu a zaměření česko­slo­
venského vývozu v meziválečném období. Acta Oeconomica Pra­
gensia, 7(15), 367–382.
Teichova, A. (1972). A Structural and Institutional Change in the
Czechoslovak Economy 1918–1938. Papers in East European Economics,
1972, no. 6.
Teichová, A. (1988). Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Tschechoslowakei 1918–
1980. Wien: Böhlau.
Teichová, A. (1994). Mezinárodní kapitál a Československo v letech 1918–
1938. Praha: Karolinum.
Tóth, A. (2015). Maďarsko ve dvacátých letech 20. století: “bethlenovská”
konsolidace nového státu a československo-maďarské hospodářsko­‑poli­
tické vztahy. Praha: Oeconomica.

Prof. PhDr. Ivan Jakubec – CSc., historian, deals with

modern economic history, especially the history of transport
and com­munications, trade, tourism, science and technology.
He works at the Institute of Economic and Social History of the
Faculty of Arts of Charles University, of which he is currently
the director, and at the Department of Economic History of the
Faculty of Economics of the Prague University of Economics
and Business. He is the author of more than one and a half
hundred works (monographs, chapters, textbooks, studies,
and articles). His most recent publications include (together
with J. Štemberk) Hotel Alcron. To the History of the Symbol of
Czech and Czechoslovak Hotel Industry (Hotel Alcron. K dějinám
symbolu českého a československého hotelnictví, Prague 2022).