|
on Confederation of Independent States |
| By: | Daniel Berkowitz; David DeJong |
| Abstract: | In the early stages of post-Soviet Russia’s economic transition, small-scale entrepreneurial activity appeared to be a strong engine of growth. Moreover, striking regional variations in initial conditions and adopted policy reforms appeared useful in accounting statistically for observed regional variations in entrepreneurial activity. Here, we investigate whether these relationships have persisted as Russia’s transition has continued to evolve, and find that they have not. We then document that the emergence of bank-issued credit, virtually non-existent outside of Moscow prior to 2000, has been an important engine of growth since 2000. Thus to date, Russia’s post-Soviet development appears as a tale of two distinct transition paths. |
| Date: | 2009–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pit:wpaper:385&r=cis |
| By: | Nadeem Ilahi; Fahad Alturki; Jaime Espinosa-Bowen |
| Abstract: | We test the extent to which growth in the 11 CIS countries (excluding Russia) was associated with developments in Russia, overall, as well as through the trade, financial and remittance channels over the last decade or so. The results point to the continued existence of economic links between the CIS countries and Russia, though these links may have altered since the 1998 crisis. Russia appears to influence regional growth mainly through the remittance channel and somewhat less so through the financial channel. There is a shrinking role of the trade (exports to Russia) channel. Russian growth shocks are associated with sizable effects on Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, and, to some extent, Georgia. |
| Date: | 2009–12–18 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:imf:imfwpa:09/277&r=cis |
| By: | Peter Havlik (The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw); Waltraut Urban (The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw); Jayati Ghosh; Marcos P. Ribeiro |
| Abstract: | The term BRICs puts under a common label the four largest fast growing emerging countries: Brazil, Russia, India and China. The BRICs show many common features, such as big land size, large population, fast economic growth etc., but important differences as well, due to their different models of economic development and resources endowments. In this report, we discuss the different models of economic development of the individual BRIC countries, with a special focus on their external relations (trade, FDI) and on likely future developments. Brazil is a domestically oriented service economy; Russia's economic development is heavily dependent on energy and raw material resources; the Indian economy is essentially service-led, supported by exports; and China's economic development is driven by manufacturing exports and investment. Finally, we explore the resulting future challenges and opportunities for EU competitiveness. |
| Keywords: | economic development, Brazil, Russia, India, China, the European Union, competitiveness, Foreign Direct Investment, Industry, International Trade and Competitiveness, Macroeconomic Analysis, Forecasts and Policy, Services |
| JEL: | O21 O53 O54 O57 |
| Date: | 2009–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wii:rpaper:rr:359&r=cis |
| By: | Kazuhiro Kumo |
| Abstract: | This paper uses the micro-data from the Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS) to identify factors that explain fertility between 1995 and 2004. An overview of nationwide birth dynamics in post-Soviet Russia shows that not only do changes in economic conditions move in lockstep with the overall birth rate trend, as has been pointed out by numerous researchers, but so too do proximate determinants of fertility, and suggests that rises and falls in the total fertility rate in Russia are also affected by factors such as demographic timing effects. Although few studies employing micro data have been conducted, it is frequently argued that the shrinking of the economy during the transition to the market economy was the reason for the decline in the birth rate. However, many demographic researchers and sociologists, particularly in Russia itself, attribute the drop in the countryfs birth rate from the 1990s to the long-term population trend, a view that also has widespread acceptance. While the previous studies all used fertility data up to 2001, this paper analyses data up to 2004, which is significant as the birth rate has shown a sustained rise since 2001. It was shown that household income levels do not have a significant impact on birth probability, and this may indicate the possibility that economic growth did not lead directly to the recovery in the birth rate. This suggests that social conditions in the broad sense may have caused the birth rate to rise. Finally, the paper examines, from a demographic perspective, the measures to encourage couples to have children that were introduced in the last days of the Putin Administration, which ended in May 2008. |
| Date: | 2009–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hst:ghsdps:gd09-104&r=cis |