The structuration of Russia’s geo-economy under economic sanctions

Aalto, Pami; Forsberg, Tuomas

doi:10.1007/s10308-015-0446-6

Cited by 38 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most tradable products are energy raw materials, such as oil and natural gas, metals, logs and chemical products. The decline of trade in oil and gas with the EU has pressured Russia to find new customers in China and APEC countries (Aalto & Forsberg, 2016). Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the commodity structure of export and import of the EU and Russia by SITC main products in 2015.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation of the EU trade with Russia based on the analysis of selected indices: Revealed comparative advantages, intra-industry trade, and trade intensity

Kašťáková

Baumgartner

2017

BEH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been many geopolitical changes and economic factors that affected the mutual trade between the EU and its main trading partners between the years 2005 and 2016. In the long term, one of the most important trade partners of the EU is Russia. It is a major supplier of energy resources to the EU as well as significant export market for European producers. Even today, when mutual trade relations are negatively influenced by trade-political sanctions, the mutual dependence is undeniable. The submission evaluates the mutual trade between the EU and Russia with the use of selected indices -revealed comparative advantages, intra-industry trade and trade intensity. The analysis of these indicators points to strategic importance of this trade relation. However, if the EU wants to sustain this relation, it should consider how to solve the current tension and after that to strengthen future mutual relations. JEL Classifications: F10, F14, F15

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation of the EU trade with Russia based on the analysis of selected indices: Revealed comparative advantages, intra-industry trade, and trade intensity

Kašťáková

Baumgartner

2017

BEH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Giumelli argued that assessing sanctions merely in terms of their coercive effects 'does not do justice to the complexity of this foreign policy instrument' (2015, 1). In a different vein, other Western scholars remain sceptical about the effects of sanctions as they consider Russia to be 'highly resilient because the many non-globalised sectors of its economy co-exist with more export-dependent sectors, such as energy (Aalto and Forsberg 2016). This view is shared by the Russian academic Tsygankov, who states that sanctions could 'strengthen the potential for anti-Western nationalism inside Russia, thereby pushing Putin toward more hawkish and provocative actions with regard to Ukraine or other Eastern European nations.…”

Section: The Eu's State-building In the Aftermath Of Crimea's Annexationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Actorness of the EU’s State-Building in Ukraine - Before and after Crimea

Maass

2019

Geopolitics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of the EU's diplomatic mission to resolve the Orange Revolution in 2004, several Russian policy makers perceived the EU as an aggressive actor which sought to undermine Russia's influence in the post-Soviet space. About a decade later, Russian policy makers are mocking the EU's limited abilities in the ongoing Ukraine crisis. The purpose of this article is to explain the reasons for this change of the EU's abilities by focusing on its state-building in Ukraine. The article examines the EU's state-building initiatives in Ukraine between November 2013 and July 2015. The article assesses the factors which shape the EU's state-building in Ukraine. It argues that the EU's state-building was hampered by two interrelated factors. First, the EU did not possess the policy tools to counterbalance Russia's affirmative foreign policy towards Ukraine which was reflected in Crimea's annexation to Russia. Second, as a consequence, this annexation turned Ukraine into a case of contested statehood. After the EU's diplomatic intervention to resolve the Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004, several Russian policy makers perceived the EU as an 'aggressive organisation', which was seeking to undermine Russia's influence over the post-Soviet space (Kondrashov 2005). Almost a decade later, Russian policy makers are mocking the EU's limited abilities in the continuing Ukraine crisis. The purpose of this article is to elucidate the reasons for this change of the EU's capacities by focusing on state-building in Ukraine between November 2013 and July 2015. November witnessed the Ukrainian President's decision to refrain from signing the EU-Ukrainian Association Agreement, whereas July marked the establishment of the EU advisory civilian mission to Ukraine, considered in this special issue as one of the EU's key tools in state-building. This article focuses on the following research question: Which factors shaped the EU's state-building initiatives in Ukraine? This article understands state-building as a process referring to the 'set of actions undertaken by [the EU] to establish, reform and strengthen

show abstract

“…The EU, the US and some other countries have introduced sanctions on Russia since spring 2014, after the annexation of Crimea. Economic sanctions have so far affected mostly new greenfield projects and especially the oil sector [96], which is the most vulnerable due to its dependence on foreign technologies [95]. Furthermore, the sanctions have also influenced diplomatic relations at the EU level.…”

Section: Impact Of Sanctions On Russiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the sanctions have also influenced diplomatic relations at the EU level. For instance, the EU-Russia Energy dialogue has not organised any high-level meetings, since the introduction of sanctions [96]. It is peculiar, however, that the nuclear power sector has been left outside sanctions, although there are many greenfield projects in Europe [91].…”

Section: Impact Of Sanctions On Russiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The impact of sanctions has been less remarkable for natural gas, as the Russian reserves are at a high level and the long-term nature of trade contracts mitigates short-term risks. However, politically one possible result is that the experience of sanctions will push Gazprom's newer European customers towards LNG and other energy sources [96]. If the sanctions continue, the difficulty for Russian LNG could be to keep up with more modern and cost effective methods, while non-Russian companies could gain a larger market share in Europe [97].…”

Section: Impact Of Sanctions On Russiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Finland’s Dependence on Russian Energy—Mutually Beneficial Trade Relations or an Energy Security Threat?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on energy security in the context of relations between European Union (EU) and Russia tend to focus on cases, with an open conflict related to supply, such as “hard” energy weapons, or on only one fuel, often natural gas. However, there is a need to understand the long-term impacts that energy relations have politically, economically and physically, and their linkages between resilience, sustainability and security. We analyse the Finnish-Russian energy relations as a case study, as they are characterised by a non-conflictual relationship. To assess this complex relationship, we apply the interdependence framework to analyse both the energy systems and energy strategies of Finland and Russia, and the energy security issues related to the notable import dependence on one supplier. Moreover, we analyse the plausible development of the energy trade between the countries in three different energy policy scenarios until 2040. The findings of the article shed light on how the trends in energy markets, climate change mitigation and broader societal and political trends could influence Russia’s energy trade relations with countries, such as Finland. Our analysis shows that Finland’s dependence on primary energy imports does not pose an acute energy security threat in terms of sheer supply, and the dependence is unlikely to worsen in the future. However, due to the difficulty in anticipating societal, political, and economic trends, there are possible developments that could affect Finland.

show abstract

The structuration of Russia’s geo-economy under economic sanctions

Cited by 38 publications

References 18 publications

The evaluation of the EU trade with Russia based on the analysis of selected indices: Revealed comparative advantages, intra-industry trade, and trade intensity

The evaluation of the EU trade with Russia based on the analysis of selected indices: Revealed comparative advantages, intra-industry trade, and trade intensity

The Actorness of the EU’s State-Building in Ukraine - Before and after Crimea

Finland’s Dependence on Russian Energy—Mutually Beneficial Trade Relations or an Energy Security Threat?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About