Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration
Article gives technique of country’s geo-economic position identification adjusted for an integration vector. This technique is based on United Nations University research (RIKS, UNESCAP, Asian Development Bank). Nature of international integration was grounded according to “Beijing Consensus” doctr...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
|---|---|
| Date: | 2013 |
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України
2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123403 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Cite this: | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration / N.V. Kostenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 189–195. — Бібліогр.: 14 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1860219055696248832 |
|---|---|
| author | Kostenko, N.V. |
| author_facet | Kostenko, N.V. |
| citation_txt | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration / N.V. Kostenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 189–195. — Бібліогр.: 14 назв. — англ. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| container_title | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| description | Article gives technique of country’s geo-economic position identification adjusted for an integration vector. This technique is based on United Nations University research (RIKS, UNESCAP, Asian Development Bank). Nature of international integration was grounded according to “Beijing Consensus” doctrine, which replaced the “Washington Consensus” doctrine. “Beijing Consensus” is perceived as economic regionalization doctrine resulting in formation of interactive and competitive regional arrangements, which create foundation for modern multipolar management of the world economy. Author gave evidence in favour of positive effect that regional integration has on member-countries’ development. Logical model for identification of country’s geo-economic position at the conclusion of regional trade agreements (RTA) was developed in the article. Pre-analysis method (ex ante) was assumed as a basis for the model. Author also defined geo-economic position of Ukraine in regional integration with the CIS countries. Export indices of Ukrainian products at the CIS market were calculated on the basis of 86th commodity group.
У статті охарактеризовано методику визначення геоекономічної позиції країни з урахуванням інтеграційного вектору. Методика грунтується на дослідженнях Університету ООН - RIKS, UNESCAP, Азійського Банку Розвитку. Обґрунтовано характер міжнародної інтеграції відповідно доктрині “Пекінського консенсусу”, яка прийшла на зміну доктрині Вашингтонського консенсусу. “Пекінський консенсус” сприймається як доктрина економічної регіоналізації, що спричиняє створення кількох взаємодіючих і конкуруючих між собою регіональних груп, які формують фундамент сучасного багатополюсного управління світовою економікою. Автором доведено позитивний вплив регіональної інтеграції на розвиток країн-партнерів. Розроблено логічну модель визначення геоекономічної позиції країн при укладанні регіональних торговельних угод, в основу якої покладено метод попереднього аналізу (ex ante). Визначено геоекономічну позицію України в процесі регіональної інтеграції з країнами СНД. На прикладі 87 товарної групи розраховано показники експорту української продукції до ринку країн СНД.
В статье описана методика по определению геоэкономической позиции страны с учетом интеграционного вектора. Методика основывается на исследованиях Университета ООН - RIKS, UNESCAP, Азиатского Банка Развития. Обоснован характер международной интеграции в соответствии с доктриной Пекинского консенсуса, которая сменила доктрину Вашингтонского консенсуса. Пекинский консенсус воспринимается как доктрина экономической регионализации, что вызывает создание нескольких взаимодействующих и конкурирующих между собой региональных групп, которые формируют фундамент современного многополюсного управления мировой экономикой. Автором доказано положительное влияние региональной интеграции на развитие стран-партнеров. Разработана логическая модель определения геоэкономической позиции стран при заключении региональных торговых соглашений, в основу которой положен метод предварительного анализа (ex-ante). Определена геоэкономическая позиция Украины в процессе региональной интеграции со странами СНГ. На примере 86 товарной группы рассчитаны показатели экспорта украинской продукции на рынок стран СНГ.
|
| first_indexed | 2025-12-07T18:17:45Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
189
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Kostenko N. V.
UDC 339.5
N. V. Kostenko,
PhD (Economics),
Donetsk National Technical University
MODEL OF COUNTRY'S GEO-ECONOMIC POSITION IDENTIFICATION IN TERMS
OF INTERNATIONAL INTEGRATION
Statement of the problem. Integration occurs on
quite certain conditions: a high level of monopoly
capitalism and its internationalization, imminence of
participating countries’ economic interests, absence of
serious political differences between them, subjective
willingness of political elites to a lose certain share of
national sovereignty for the benefit of resolving the long-
term economic and political integration tasks and their
readiness to form these tasks [1, p. 335]. Modern states
prefer regional integration as a result of failure to address
issues such as trade policy within international institutions.
Trade policy gradually becomes really transparent in the
form of regional integration since it relies on a parity
basis on the assumption of countries’ economic interests.
Regional integration can enhance the dynamic effects due
to specialization and increase the degree of industry
localization.
This trend has caused concern among the
supporters of the GATT / WTO. On February 6, 1996
General Council of WTO established a Committee on
Regional Trade Agreements (RTA). The purpose of the
committee is to study the regional arrangements and
assess their compliance with the WTO requirements. This
committee also studies the possible impact of regional
agreements on the multilateral trading system and
relationship between regional and multilateral agreements.
Analysis of recent research. The theoretical basis,
characteristics, causes and analysis of international
integration is currently being developed by foreign
scientists, namely M. Shiff, A. Winters [2], I. Hurova [3],
A. Liman, L. Zevin [4], I. Tochytskaya [5], and Ukrainian
scientists: O. Bilorus, D. Lukyanenko [6], A. Shnypko [7]
and others.
O. Bilorus and D. Lukyanenko define the concept
of international economic integration as an objective
conscious and purposeful process of rapprochement,
mutual adjustment and merger of national economic
systems. According to them it has the potential of self-
regulation and development and is based on independent
economic players’ economic interest and the international
division of labor [6, p. 224].
Rationale for the integration associations’
development according to A. Liman and L. Zevin provides
six benefits. Firstly, a larger region has more opportunities
for specialization and thereafter for the division of labor
grounded on comparative advantage, which is the basis
for effectiveness increase. Secondly, a large region has
significant opportunities to use economies of scale due
to the larger number of prospective customers. Thirdly,
a large area can provide high competitive pressure on
businesses and thereby reduce X-inefficiency. Fourthly,
the size of the region makes it possible to launch large-
scale projects requiring substantial labor costs and
material resources. Fifthly, markets’ openness is a positive
factor in changing the industrial structure in terms of
firms “remaining on the market”. Finally, larger regions
usually are less deficient in management personnel of
high quality while diversity may become a source of
creativity and growth [4, p. 69 – 70].
The World Bank experts emphasizes that regional
trade agreements (including bilateral free trade agreements
between the North and the South, and trade preferences
agreements between the countries of the South) can
create favorable conditions for rapid poverty reduction.
However it is possible only if developing countries integrate
these agreements into the strategy of trade liberalization
in three directions – unilaterally, in multilateral and regional
relations [8].
The positive role of regional integration is manifested
in the desire of countries to establish relationships, finding
common general historical events, share experiences and
knowledge and cultural heritage. In this perspective
regional integration is the form of influence on state
institutions through the proclamation of supranational
goals, ideas and safety standards. Regional integration
will expand the boundaries of economic control across
national boundaries, building new benchmarks of socio-
economic development and incremental transition to a
global society. The rapid growth of regional arrangements
in the early 21st century calls for research and determination
of regional integration effectiveness.
Body text. Exploring various aspects of economic
integration M. Schiff and A. Winters recommend states
to follow certain rules governing successful integration,
which were developed through international experience.
Among these rules are the following: integration with
wealthier and stronger states is beneficial; cost-effective
integration associations are politically rational; integration
serves as the impetus for reform; integration strengthens
the security of the state; integration increases investment;
190
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Kostenko N. V.
integration encourages competition; integration optimizes
the tax system; the World Trade Organization does not
protect against integration faults [2, p. 93]. So while
determining their geo-economic position in the global
coordinate system countries should clearly rate their
regional priorities.
To replace the Washington Consensus alternative
the Beijing Consensus doctrine was proposed.
In 2004 the London Centre for International Policy
published a report entitled “Beijing Consensus” where
this doctrine’s specifics were disclosed. Fundamental
postulate of “Beijing Consensus” doctrine is to increase
the share of GDP that is redistributed by the state, and to
increase state control over private capital (not excepting
although public-private partnership). “Beijing Consensus”
is perceived as economic regionalization doctrine, which
results in the creation of several interacting and competing
regional arrangements that form the foundation of
modern multipolar management of the world economy.
Strengthening the role of the state and international
organizations is a defining feature of “Beijing Consensus”
doctrine. At the same time the role of many international
financial organizations (WTO, IMF, World Bank, etc.) is
secondary [9, p. 12 – 13].
The basic premise of integration is trade liberalization.
That is why in our view it is advisable to monitor the
integration process through the implementation of trade
policy.
States’ union in regional integration arrangements
framework requires relevant approaches to their collaboration
assessment. Such interaction is based on strengthening
the static and dynamic effects arising from spatial localization
expansion in the framework of regional integration
arrangements and positive impact on macroeconomic
performance.
According to the United Nations method trade policy
is assessed within the following indicators’ groups:
– Indicators of commercial activity;
– Indicators assessing the direction of trade;
– Indicators of the sectoral trade structure;
– Indicators of tariff protection.
In a context of global trade flows the degree of
countries' integration into the world economy is measured
by means of foreign trade. Current practices in regional
integration evaluation and measurement are based on
indicators of bilateral trade flows (exports and imports)
and GDP. Indicators of trade integration are measured
within the integration arrangement (intra-trade) as well
as outside it (extra-trade).
For measurement of intra-regional and extra-regional
trade the following parameters are applied within OECD
method [7, p. 60 – 73]:
1) index of intra-regional trade volume;
2) the indices of extra-regional trade arrangements;
3) index reflecting the degree of member countries’
integration in regional trading communications.
Extra-regional trade reflects the nature of trade
expansion outside the integration arrangement.
Extra-regional trade commodity composition describes
arrangements’ role and place in the international division
of labor. Trends in intra- and extra-CIS trade are shown
in Figure 1.
Developed by the author on the basis of data from Interstate Statistical Committee of the CIS official web-site:
http://www.cisstat.com/pagetop.htm
Fig. 1. Trends in intra- and extra-CIS trade, biln. USD
26 ,3
78 ,9
103,6
143,5 1 42,4
111 ,4
346 ,3
455 ,8
604 ,3 615
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2000 2009 2010 2011 2012
intra-trade
extra-trade
191
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Kostenko N. V.
Study of mutual exports dynamics among regional
integration arrangements and increase of its share in total
exports of integration unit represent clear evidence of
international economic integration development. Formation
of a strong domestic market for regional arrangement
gives it the opportunity to significantly reduce the risks
from fluctuations on world markets.
Regional market share of the country is proposed
to be calculated by UNESCAP method. Regional market
share shows the relative importance for member countries
to trade on intra-regional level within trade bloc. The
larger is the value of the share, the more trade block
export dominates in the economy of a member-country
[10, p. 42 – 43].
Competitiveness at any level is realized through
domestic and foreign trade. However it is undoubted that
the basis of competitive advantage is created at all levels
of society largely due to progressive structure of the real
economy and its well-timed restructuring [7, p. 197].
Thus trade policy should reflect the industrial policy of
regional blocs. The division of labor within the regional
bloc will improve the economy structure of each country
individually.
Under the formation and strengthening of integration
associations’ role with a lapse of time trade flows are
being reoriented to priority markets. The main flows of
goods move among member-countries ensuring the
domestic demand and supply saturation. It will result in
retention of internal regional trade predominance over
foreign trade. There is a low proportion of intra-regional
trade in SIC. That is why integration arrangement potential
has significant prospects for future cooperation.
Manufactured products foreign trade is divided into
intra- and inter-branch. The level of intra-industry trade
is determined by the “quality” of economic integration in
the world market, because the more developed a country
is technically and economically, the higher the share of
intra-industry trade in its turnover. The development of
intra-industry trade stimulates the exchange of new
technologies and promotes economic growth [5, p. 15].
Investigation of quantitative indicators of trade
relations between regional integration arrangements would
be incomplete without defining qualitative characteristics
of exports and imports by product groups according to
the standards of international trade classification (SITC).
When planning to join the free trade country should
realize which of its sectors are effective (i.e. characterized
by better export potential). Relatively ineffective sectors
should intensify imports. Concluding the agreement on
free trade zone countries are interested in increase of
trade complementarity and competitiveness. When
countries trade similar products their joining the free trade
area (FTA) can yield a loss instead of trade expansion.
To determine the position of product groups by
UNESCAP method [10, p. 76 – 84] and the Asian
Development Bank methodology [11, p. 32 – 40] offered
to trade within a regional trade agreement the following
indices are calculated:
– Revealed Comparative Advantage index (RCAij);
– Revealed Symmetric Comparative Advantage
index (RSCA);
– Regional Orientation index (ROt,i);
– Intra-Industry Trade index (GLij);
– Trade Complementarity index (Ckj);
– Competitiveness index (Rc);
– Index of Main Export Categories (IMEC).
Methodology used in WITS database calculates the
index of export specialization (ES). It is a modified RCA
index where the denominator is usually measured by specific
markets or partners. It provides information about products
as a result of specialization in the export sector of the country.
ES is calculated as the ratio between share of food in total
exports for country і and share of imported products in
specific markets or partners rather than its share in world
exports. ES index is similar to RCA that values of less than
unity indicates a comparative disadvantage and values greater
than one reflects specialization on this market [12].
A methodology underlying developed by the author
model of determining the geo-economic position at the
conclusion of regional trade agreements (RTA) is reflected
in Fig. 2. Suggested in Fig. 2 logical model is based on
the definition of the integration core, i.e. the detection of
the countries’ position in mutual trade. According to the
mass attraction law the presence of the core formed by
powerful countries will attract less developed countries
to cooperate. This model relates to ex-ante (or pre-
analysis) methods, and simplifies the decision making
concerning determining the relationship between regional
arrangements’ trade partners.
On October, 18, 2011 eight CIS countries (Russian
Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia,
Kirghizstan, Moldova and Tajikistan) signed Free Trade
Agreement (CISFTA) [13]. In early September 2012 only
3 of the 8 countries, which concluded CIS Free Trade
Agreement, have ratified it on the national level. Ukraine
is among them. On September 23, 2012 CISFTA began
to work for Russian Federation, Ukraine and Belarus as
other countries have not determined conclusively. Basing
on the proposed logical model we determined position of
Ukraine and Russian Federation in the CIS Free Trade
Agreement (as reflected in Fig. 3).
According to Fig. 3 the cumulative share of regional
block’s internal trade in world exports and imports is
negligible and was only 0.78% in 2012. The average share
of internal trade in the region decreased over 11 years
from 11.7% in 2000 to 11.1% in 2010.
192
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Kostenko N. V.
Comparison of these two indicators permits to
estimate the homogeneity degree of regional integration
arrangements. Excess of second indicator over the first
one reflects the trading block heterogeneity, which is
connected with the presence of a large trading partner
dominating the association (namely Russian Federation).
Russian Federation’s export share was 57.5% in 2010
and 54.8% in 2012, Ukraine’s – 18.1% and 17.8%
respectively, Belarus’ – 13.1% and 16.6% respectively,
Kazakhstan’s – 7.7% and 8% respectively; other countries’
shares were less than 2%. Although integration core is
formed by Russian Federation, Ukraine can join with the
lapse of time. So the delay time and political dispute
between two countries in full scale hinder the CIS
reintegration.
Indicator of intra-regional trade for Ukraine within
the CIS increased from 4.46% in 2000 to 18.7% in 2010
that is 4 times as much. Thus the value of trading partners
for Ukraine was constantly growing.
Index demonstrating the degree of regional
arrangement members’ integration into regional trade ties
also reflects the rapid growth from 54% in 2000 to 87%
in 2010.
Trade inversion symmetry index for the CIS
countries is taken from the regional arrangements database
of the United Nations University (RIKS). The database
contains indices to 2010 inclusive. Index value was much
more than one and accounted for 16.9% in 2010. This
indicates the relative importance of internal regional trade
for the CIS countries as against trade with the rest of the
world.
At the final stage we estimated the position of 86th
commodity group for Ukraine and Russian Federation in
2011 as powerful partners of this regional bloc. As it is
demonstrated in Fig. 3 Ukraine has the best position in
this product group as revealed comparative advantage
index (RCAij) amounts 20.998, and revealed symmetric
comparative advantage index (RSCA) is positive and
accounts for 0.909. In comparison with Ukraine Russian
Federation has no tangible competitive advantage in this
commodity group. Other indices for Ukraine also meet
the conditions set forth in the model. For example the
trade complementarity index amounts 80.7 and shows
how Ukraine’s export profile meets import profile of
Russian Federation. Export specialization index for
Ukraine accounted for 3.58 units. Since this index exceeds
one export specialization is advisable for Ukraine in 86th
commodity group on Russian market.
Index of major export articles amounted 40% in
total of CIS exports for 86th commodity group (IMEC = 0,4).
The index takes on a value from 0 to 100 percent. Indices
with higher values indicate higher product significance
in the export profile of regional trade arrangement.
Therefore commodity group mentioned above is
considerable for countries’ export as represents engineering
products.
The results reflect the importance of Ukrainian
exports to the CIS by 86th commodity group.
According to Ukrinform Russian Federation has
suspended imports of Ukrainian wagons produced
on “Kriukov car building works”, “Dneprovagonmash”
and “Azovobschemash” by the decision of the Federal
Budgetary Organization “Register of Certification on the
Federal Railway Transport” for technical reasons [14].
In this connection adopted restrictions will have adverse
effect on this commodity group’s export in 2013.
Conclusions and suggestions for further research.
The proposed logical model simplifies the decision-
making process regarding participation in integration
arrangements by major indices. Indices can be calculated
for 2-, 4- and 6-digit level codes of the Harmonized
System nomenclature (HS). Thus each enterprise can
determine its product’s position in any geographic direction
at the micro level. Pre-analysis conducted by the author
shows the significance for Ukraine to participate in the
CIS Free Trade Agreement. Operation of the regional
arrangement in full format to determine its effectiveness
in future requires conducting the post factum analysis.
References
1. Основы торговой политики и правила ВТО. –
М. : Междунар. отношения, 2005. – С. 335. 2. Шифф М.
Региональная интеграция и развитие: перевод с англ. /
М. Шифф, Л. Уинтерс. – М. : Издательство “Весь мир”,
2005. – C. 93. 3. Гурова И. П. Измерение глобальной
и региональной торговой интеграции / И. П. Гурова //
Евразийская экономическая интеграция. – 2009. –
№ 3 (4). – С. 60 – 73. 4. Лиман А. М. Интегрирую-
щееся региональное пространство: дополнительные
возможности экономического роста / А. М. Лиман,
Л. З. Зевин // Евразийская экономическая интегра-
ция. – 2009. – № 2 (3). – С. 69 – 70. 5. Точицкая И.
Анализ динамики торговли в ЕврАзЭС / И. Точицкая //
Экономическое обозрение. – 2008. – № 1. – С. 15.
6. Белорус О. Г. Глобальные трансформации и страте-
гии развития: монография / О. Г. Белорус, Д. Г. Лукья-
ненко. – К. : Орияне, 2000. – С. 224. 7. Шнипко О. С.
Конкурентоспроможність України в умовах глобалі-
зації / О. С. Шнипко; НАН України; Ін-т екон. та про-
гнозув. – К., 2009. – С. 197. 8. Офіційний сайт Світо-
вого Банку [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу :
http://web.worldbank.org 9. Науменкова С. Форму-
вання нової фінансової архітектури: основні питання
та можливі виклики для України / С. Науменкова //
Вісник НБУ. – 2010. – № 1. – С. 12 – 13. 10. Mia Mikic,
John Gilbert Trade Statistics in Policymaking. A Handbook
193
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Identification of integration core and countries’ position in RTA
Calculation of intra-regional trade volume index ХN
intra
and index demonstrating the degree of regional arrangement members’ integration
into regional trade ties ТІGi
i
Integration core presence
no
Se
ar
ch
o
f p
ar
tn
er
s o
r n
on
-in
te
gr
at
io
n
in
n
ea
r-
te
rm
o
ut
lo
ok
yes
Gradual increase of ХN
intra and ТІGi
i no yes
Identification of country’s regional share in RTA Dij
Estimation of RTA interior trade intensity ІТІІі
no yes
ІТІІі>1? no
Identification of commodity groups’ positions by means of UNESCAP and WITS methodology
yes
RCAij>1 RSCA>0 ROt,i>1 GLij →1 Ckj→100 Rc→100
IMEC →100 ES>1
yes no
Dij increases?
Estimation of potential economic effect of RTA by means of economic and
mathematical simulation methods: SMART, GTAP, CGE
Start of competitiveness estimation in terms of RTA
Identification of RTA members
Forming of member-countries’ database
Presence of positive effects no yes
Text initialing and conclusion of a treaty with partner-countries and national ratification of RTA
Identification of integration vectors and priorities in RTA
Fig. 2. Logical model of determining the geo-economic position at the conclusion of Regional Trade Agreements (RTA)
Kostenko N. V.
194
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Calculations are conducted by the author on the basis of: RIKS, State Statistics Service of Ukraine and official web-site of the CIS
Statistical Committee: www.cisstat.com
Fig. 3. Model of Ukraine’s and Russian Federation’s geo-economic position identification at the conclusion of FTA
with the CIS countries
iG
IxMiD = 0,43%(2000); 0,68% (2012) =N
raDint 11,7% (2000); 11,1% (2012)
ХN
intra=4,46(2000); 18,7(2010)
ТІGi
i=54%(2000); 87%(2010)
Integration core presence
Russian Federation and Ukraine yes
Gradual increase of ХN
intra та ТІGi
i yes
Dij=17,1 (2000); 18,1% (2010)
ІТІІі=16,3(2000); 16,9(2010)
yes
ІТІІі>1?
Identification of 86th commodity group’s positions by means of UNESCAP and WITS methodology
yes
RCAij>1
RSCA>0
ROt,i>1 GLij →1 Ckj→100 Rc→100
IMEC →100 ES>1
Dij increases?
CIS members: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan
Database of the CIS Statistical Committee
yes
Conclusion of FTA with partner-countries and national ratification
Russian Federation
RCAij =0,462 RSCA= -0,368
GLij =0,17 Ckj=89,1(Russian
Federation -Ukraine)
ES=0,09 Rc =1,38
Ukraine
RCAij =20,998 RSCA=0,909
GLij =0,19 Ckj=80,7 (Ukraine-
Russian Federation)
ES=3,58 Rc =16,24
Conditions are met
Kostenko N. V.
195
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Kostenko N. V.
of Commonly Used Trade Indices and Indicators. Revised
Edition. Economical and Social Commission for Asia and
the Pacific, 2009, Р. 42 – 43. 11. Plummer M., Cheong D.,
Hamanaka S. Methodology for Impact Assessment of
Free Trade Agreements. Mandaluyong City, Philippines:
Asian Development Bank, 2010. – C. 32 – 40. 12. Офі-
ційний сайт WITS/ [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим
доступу : http://wits.worldbank.org/WITS/WITS/
WITSHELP/Content/Utilities/e1.trade_indicators.htm
13. Текст Договору про зону вільної торгівлі з країна-
ми СНД // [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу :
http://economics.unian.net/files/1321777387.pdf
14. Офіційний сайт Укрінформ [Електронний ре-
сурс]. – Режим доступу: http://www.ukrinform.ua/rus/
newsrossiya_obyasnila_pochemu_priostanovila_import_ukrainskih_
vagonov_1572142
Костенко Н. В. Модель визначення геоеконо-
мічніої позиції країни в процесі міжнародної інте-
грації
У статті охарактеризовано методику визначення
геоекономічної позиції країни з урахуванням інтегра-
ційного вектору. Методика грунтується на дослідженнях
Університету ООН – RIKS, UNESCAP, Азійського Бан-
ку Розвитку. Обґрунтовано характер міжнародної інте-
грації відповідно доктрині “Пекінського консенсусу”,
яка прийшла на зміну доктрині Вашингтонського кон-
сенсусу. “Пекінський консенсус” сприймається як док-
трина економічної регіоналізації, що спричиняє ство-
рення кількох взаємодіючих і конкуруючих між собою
регіональних груп, які формують фундамент сучасно-
го багатополюсного управління світовою економікою.
Автором доведено позитивний вплив регіональної інте-
грації на розвиток країн-партнерів. Розроблено логічну
модель визначення геоекономічної позиції країн при
укладанні регіональних торговельних угод, в основу
якої покладено метод попереднього аналізу (ex ante).
Визначено геоекономічну позицію України в процесі
регіональної інтеграції з країнами СНД. На прикладі 87
товарної групи розраховано показники експорту україн-
ської продукції до ринку країн СНД.
Ключові слова: геоекономічна позиція, конкурен-
тоспроможність, регіональна інтеграція, “Пекінський
консенсус”, СНД.
Костенко Н. В. Модель определения геоэко-
номической позиции страны в процессе между-
народной интеграции
В статье описана методика по определению гео-
экономической позиции страны с учетом интеграци-
онного вектора. Методика основывается на исследо-
ваниях Университета ООН – RIKS, UNESCAP, Азиат-
ского Банка Развития. Обоснован характер междуна-
родной интеграции в соответствии с доктриной Пе-
кинского консенсуса, которая сменила доктрину Ва-
шингтонского консенсуса. Пекинский консенсус вос-
принимается как доктрина экономической регионали-
зации, что вызывает создание нескольких взаимодей-
ствующих и конкурирующих между собой региональ-
ных групп, которые формируют фундамент современ-
ного многополюсного управления мировой экономи-
кой. Автором доказано положительное влияние реги-
ональной интеграции на развитие стран-партнеров.
Разработана логическая модель определения геоэко-
номической позиции стран при заключении региональ-
ных торговых соглашений, в основу которой поло-
жен метод предварительного анализа (ex-ante). Опре-
делена геоэкономическая позиция Украины в процес-
се региональной интеграции со странами СНГ. На при-
мере 86 товарной группы рассчитаны показатели экс-
порта украинской продукции на рынок стран СНГ.
Ключевые слова: геоэкономическое позиция, кон-
курентоспособность, региональная интеграция, “Пе-
кинский консенсус”, СНГ.
Kostenko N. V. Model of Country’s Geo-
economic Position Identification in Terms of
International Integration
Article gives technique of country’s geo-economic
position identification adjusted for an integration vector.
This technique is based on United Nations University
research (RIKS, UNESCAP, Asian Development Bank).
Nature of international integration was grounded according
to “Beijing Consensus” doctrine, which replaced the
“Washington Consensus” doctrine. “Beijing Consensus”
is perceived as economic regionalization doctrine resulting
in formation of interactive and competitive regional
arrangements, which create foundation for modern
multipolar management of the world economy. Author
gave evidence in favour of positive effect that regional
integration has on member-countries’ development. Logical
model for identification of country’s geo-economic
position at the conclusion of regional trade agreements
(RTA) was developed in the article. Pre-analysis method
(ex ante) was assumed as a basis for the model. Author
also defined geo-economic position of Ukraine in regional
integration with the CIS countries. Export indices of
Ukrainian products at the CIS market were calculated on
the basis of 86th commodity group.
Key words: geo-economic position, competitiveness,
regional integration, “Beijing Consensus”, CIS.
Received by the editors: 20.10.2013
and final form 04.12.2013
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-123403 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| issn | 1817-3772 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-12-07T18:17:45Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| publisher | Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Kostenko, N.V. 2017-09-03T19:37:07Z 2017-09-03T19:37:07Z 2013 Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration / N.V. Kostenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 189–195. — Бібліогр.: 14 назв. — англ. 1817-3772 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123403 339.5 Article gives technique of country’s geo-economic position identification adjusted for an integration vector. This technique is based on United Nations University research (RIKS, UNESCAP, Asian Development Bank). Nature of international integration was grounded according to “Beijing Consensus” doctrine, which replaced the “Washington Consensus” doctrine. “Beijing Consensus” is perceived as economic regionalization doctrine resulting in formation of interactive and competitive regional arrangements, which create foundation for modern multipolar management of the world economy. Author gave evidence in favour of positive effect that regional integration has on member-countries’ development. Logical model for identification of country’s geo-economic position at the conclusion of regional trade agreements (RTA) was developed in the article. Pre-analysis method (ex ante) was assumed as a basis for the model. Author also defined geo-economic position of Ukraine in regional integration with the CIS countries. Export indices of Ukrainian products at the CIS market were calculated on the basis of 86th commodity group. У статті охарактеризовано методику визначення геоекономічної позиції країни з урахуванням інтеграційного вектору. Методика грунтується на дослідженнях Університету ООН - RIKS, UNESCAP, Азійського Банку Розвитку. Обґрунтовано характер міжнародної інтеграції відповідно доктрині “Пекінського консенсусу”, яка прийшла на зміну доктрині Вашингтонського консенсусу. “Пекінський консенсус” сприймається як доктрина економічної регіоналізації, що спричиняє створення кількох взаємодіючих і конкуруючих між собою регіональних груп, які формують фундамент сучасного багатополюсного управління світовою економікою. Автором доведено позитивний вплив регіональної інтеграції на розвиток країн-партнерів. Розроблено логічну модель визначення геоекономічної позиції країн при укладанні регіональних торговельних угод, в основу якої покладено метод попереднього аналізу (ex ante). Визначено геоекономічну позицію України в процесі регіональної інтеграції з країнами СНД. На прикладі 87 товарної групи розраховано показники експорту української продукції до ринку країн СНД. В статье описана методика по определению геоэкономической позиции страны с учетом интеграционного вектора. Методика основывается на исследованиях Университета ООН - RIKS, UNESCAP, Азиатского Банка Развития. Обоснован характер международной интеграции в соответствии с доктриной Пекинского консенсуса, которая сменила доктрину Вашингтонского консенсуса. Пекинский консенсус воспринимается как доктрина экономической регионализации, что вызывает создание нескольких взаимодействующих и конкурирующих между собой региональных групп, которые формируют фундамент современного многополюсного управления мировой экономикой. Автором доказано положительное влияние региональной интеграции на развитие стран-партнеров. Разработана логическая модель определения геоэкономической позиции стран при заключении региональных торговых соглашений, в основу которой положен метод предварительного анализа (ex-ante). Определена геоэкономическая позиция Украины в процессе региональной интеграции со странами СНГ. На примере 86 товарной группы рассчитаны показатели экспорта украинской продукции на рынок стран СНГ. en Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України Економічний вісник Донбасу Management of Labour and Safety Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration Модель визначення геоекономічніої позиції країни в процесі міжнародної інтеграції Модель определения геоэкономической позиции страны в процессе международной интеграции Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration Kostenko, N.V. Management of Labour and Safety |
| title | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration |
| title_alt | Модель визначення геоекономічніої позиції країни в процесі міжнародної інтеграції Модель определения геоэкономической позиции страны в процессе международной интеграции |
| title_full | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration |
| title_fullStr | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration |
| title_full_unstemmed | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration |
| title_short | Model of Country’s Geoeconomic Position Identification in Terms of International Integration |
| title_sort | model of country’s geoeconomic position identification in terms of international integration |
| topic | Management of Labour and Safety |
| topic_facet | Management of Labour and Safety |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123403 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kostenkonv modelofcountrysgeoeconomicpositionidentificationintermsofinternationalintegration AT kostenkonv modelʹviznačennâgeoekonomíčníoípozicííkraínivprocesímížnarodnoííntegracíí AT kostenkonv modelʹopredeleniâgeoékonomičeskoipoziciistranyvprocessemeždunarodnoiintegracii |