|
on Confederation of Independent States |
| By: | Vasily B. Kashin (National Research University Higher School of Economics); Alexandra D. Yankova (National Research University Higher School of Economics) |
| Abstract: | Interregional and cross-border cooperation between Russia and China is not only an important part of bilateral interactions, but also an incentive for the accelerated development of border territories. Studying the results of Russian-Chinese cross-border cooperation over the past 30 years makes it possible to track the institutional changes of the two countries, as well as the overall dynamics of their foreign trade and investment activities. The main feature of the current state of Russian-Chinese cross-border cooperation is the gradual fading of interest in it on both sides, which is in contradiction with the growing number of state programs, framework agreements and initiatives with serious political support. In order to understand the reasons for such an imbalance, this paper consistently analyzes the main dimensions and indicators of Russian-Chinese cross-border cooperation, as well as the regulatory framework and the results of the implementation of state programs and projects. On the example of successful and failed cases, an attempt is made to identify the deep obstacles to the development of interregional cooperation at different levels and compare them with the problems that Chinese experts highlight |
| Keywords: | cross-border cooperation, regional economy, regulatory framework, local elite, Far East, Russia, China. |
| JEL: | E60 |
| Date: | 2021 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hig:wpaper:42/ir/2021&r= |
| By: | Ruslan Gulidov; Elena Veprikova (Federal Autonomous Scientific Institution «Eastern State Planning Center») |
| Abstract: | The paper presents a snapshot of the socio-economic development of the Khabarovsky Krai, a region of the Russian Federation. General information on the territory (the number and density of the population, the pattern of settlements, the presence of undeveloped and border areas) is presented. The problems of the infrastructure availability of the region are identified. The region's current stage of economic development is analyzed, including the performance of the key economy sectors, foreign economic activity, employment, labor productivity and wages, investments, and preferential regimes. The state and features of the use of the resource potential are demonstrated. The level of social development and the quality of life in the Khabarovsky Krai are presented. The state and potential of regional budgets are revealed. Based on the comprehensive analysis of a wide array of relevant factual data, the key competitive advantages, limitations and development potentials of the Khabarovsk Krai are revealed. The paper is intended for specialists in the regional economics, regional and local government officials, faculty members, graduates and postgraduates as well as other readers interested in the development of the Russian Far East and the Khabarovsky Krai, in particular. |
| Keywords: | socio-economic development, development of the territory, transport infrastructure, energy infrastructure, communications infrastructure, land resources, mineral resources, forest resources, aquatic biological resources, foreign economic activity, employment, labor productivity, wages, investments, preferential regimes, well-being, social development, regional budget, development limitations, development drivers |
| JEL: | R10 J1 O10 |
| Date: | 2020–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:aln:wpaper:350-00001-20/1&r= |
| By: | Michela Giorcelli; Bo Li |
| Abstract: | This paper studies the causal effect of technology and knowledge transfers on early industrial development. Between 1950 and 1957, the Soviet Union supported the “156 Projects” in China for the construction of technologically advanced, large-scale, capital-intensive industrial facilities. We exploit idiosyncratic delays in project completion and the unexpected end of the Sino-Soviet Alliance, due to which some projects received Soviet technology embedded in capital goods and know-how, while others were eventually realized by China alone using domestic technology. We find that receiving both Soviet technology and know-how had large, persistent effects on plant performance, while the effects of receiving only Soviet capital goods were short-lived. The intervention generated horizontal and vertical spillovers, as well as production reallocation from state-owned to privately owned companies since the late 1990s. |
| JEL: | L2 M2 N34 N64 O32 O33 |
| Date: | 2021–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29455&r= |