Development Of Cross-border Infrastructure Research Articles

Transcarpathia in Ukrainian-Hungarian Relations 1991-2022

The relevance of the research lies in the fact that in the conditions of the modern stage, cooperation and relations between Ukraine and Hungary are tense. This is related to the pro-Russian position of Hungarian politicians, which arose after the appearance of the conflict in Donbas in 2014. Additionally, Hungarians defend their position regarding the level of protection and support of their minorities on the territory of Ukraine. It is reasonable to believe that Hungary is blocking Ukraine's path to European integration through open conflicts. The purpose of the article is the study of Ukrainian-Hungarian relations in the period 1991-2022, as well as the resolution of the conflict regarding Transcarpathia to stabilize relations between the countries. The methods used in the work include the historical method, based on which the dynamics of the development of relations between countries were studied; the statistical method, which consists in studying the demography of Transcarpathia; a comparative method based on which the consequences of the influence of relations on Ukraine's integration into Europe were considered. The results of the study determined that the improvement of relations between the countries can take place through the provision of simplified conditions for obtaining Hungarian citizenship for Hungarians from other countries, as well as the promotion of the development of cross-border infrastructure in Transcarpathia to provide new opportunities for the population, which will be an impetus for development in the political and cultural aspect, as well as the termination of cooperation between Ukraine and Hungary. The found ways of resolving conflicts between the countries will be an incentive for the development of both states: Ukraine will be able to continue its integration into Europe and establish favorable conditions for cooperation with Hungary; Hungary will be able to improve its relations with neighboring countries and stabilize the political aspect of these relations. The practical value of the research lies in the use of scientific material and its results to create a unified strategy for the establishment of Ukrainian-Hungarian relations, as well as the continuation of the integration movement of Ukraine into Europe

China — Mongolia — Russia Economic Corridor Program: Problems and Prospects for Implementation

The 100-th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Russia and Mongolia, which the two neighboring countries will celebrate on November 5, 2021, gives a serious reason to assess the current state of bilateral cooperation, existing problems and prospects for its development. In recent years, the issues of intensification of Russian-Mongolian relations have been considered in the context of the trilateral «Program for the creation of the China-Mongolia-Russia economic corridor». Despite the lack of concrete results within the framework of this program, the implementation of a number of infrastructure projects is being prepared, which will seriously strengthen the economic base of cooperation between Russia and Mongolia and China. The paper analyzes the problematic issues of the implementation of plans for the development of transport and energy infrastructure through Mongolia, which are considered as the basis for trilateral cooperation. Particular attention is paid to plans for the development of the railway network. The promising directions for the development of cross-border infrastructure in the framework of the program for the creation of the Mongolian corridor are identified.

Attracting private financing in cross-border infrastructure investments

Cross-border infrastructure projects offer significant economic and social benefits for the Asia-Pacific region. If the required investment of $8 trillion in pan-Asian connectivity was made in the region’s infrastructure during 2010–2020, the total net income gains for developing Asia could reach about $12.98 trillion (in 2008 US dollars) during 2010–2020 and beyond, of which more than $4.43 trillion would be gained during 2010–2020 and nearly $8.55 trillion after 2020. Indeed, infrastructure connectivity helps improve regional productivity and competitiveness by facilitating the movement of goods, services and human resources, producing economies of scale, promoting trade and foreign direct investments, creating new business opportunities, stimulating inclusive industrialization and narrowing development gaps between communities, countries or sub-regions. Unfortunately, due to limited financing, progress in the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region is low.This paper examines the key challenges faced in financing cross-border projects and discusses the roles that different stakeholders—national governments, state-owned enterprises, private sector, regional entities, development financing institutions (DFIs), affected people and civil society organizations—can play in facilitating the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region. In particular, this paper highlights the major risks that deter private sector investments and FDIs and provides recommendations to address these risks.

Sustaining the Momentum for Building a Northeast Asian Economic Community

This year witnessed political tensions resulting from a series of provocative nuclear and missiles tests in North Korea and from domestic political unrest, culminating in the abrupt leadership change in the Republic of Korea. All these events pose enormous challenges for minimizing the risks of military confrontation and war in the Northeast Asian region. A significant dampening factor on these possibilities is the real progress made in recent decades in economic cooperation and integration within the region, which contributes to reducing military action in the Korean Peninsula. North Korea, however, still remains the critical gap in an otherwise productive network of dynamic regional economic growth. For Northeast Asia, there is a continuing and growing need for promoting peaceful economic interactions and research on a common basis for cross border economic cooperation for the future common good, as a means of ameliorating political tensions and frictions in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia. Toward this end, the KIEP–NEAEF collaborative project seeks to fulfill the need for timely and forward-looking research activities by focusing on some of the critical components, such as strengthening economic cooperation with China and exploring future scenarios of North Korea as an integral part of broader regional economic cooperation in the region. This collaborative work on Northeast Asia remains essential in carrying out activities aimed at building a future Northeast Asian economic community on the basis of the strong network the NEAEF has built over the years for functional economic cooperation, through discussions and consultations among stakeholder country experts on issues such as cross border infrastructure development and financial cooperation. This volume in the series of proceedings volumes is titled Sustaining the Momentum for Building a Northeast Asian Economic Community and comprises summaries of research presentations and discussions on building a Northeast Asian economic community presented at the planning meeting in Honolulu and at the Annual Conference of the Northeast Asia Economic Forum in Hong Kong, China, in 2017. The results of this project represent activities that have been contributing to efforts toward regional economic cooperation and have been carried out in a spirit of cooperation. KIEP is grateful to Dr. Lee-Jay Cho, Chairman of NEAEF, for his leadership in implementing the project, and to the authors of the presentations, conference participants and discussants who contributed to this volume. Drs. Lee-Jay Cho and Hyung-Gon Jeong would like to extend their appreciation to the NEAEF staff for their assistance in the course of the successful implementation of this project, and to Drs. Karla Fallon and Kennon Breazeale for their editorial review and editing of this volume.

CROSS-BORDER INFRASTRUCTURE

For the English abstract and full text of the article please see the attached PDF-File (English version follows Russian version).Russian borderlands: socio-political and infrastructure problems / Ed. by V. A. Kolosov and A. B. Volodin. Moscow, 2016, 188 p. ABSTRACT The collection includes materials from All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference «Cross-Border Infrastructure of Russia», organized in February 2016 on the initiative of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Agency for Development of Cross-Border Infrastructure and Moscow State Academy of Water Transport. The publication consists of two sections, which present the results of studies by geographers, economists, sociologists on economic, sociocultural, infrastructural problems of the borderland, as well as development and operation of cross-border infrastructure and transport. Keywords: «Economic belt of the Silk Road», international logistics, state border, transport, cross-border infrastructure.

Current challenges for regional development: threats to economic security

The article deals with current challenges for regional development and their impact as causes of threats to economic security. Economic security is seen as a complex multilevel system, the formation of which occurs at various levels of economy’s hierarchy: the state level, an economic sector, an industry (economic activity), a region, a business enterprise, a city, a town, a village, a local territorial community, a person. It is determined that a region’s internal and external environment is the key factor of its economic security. The assessment, which was carried out, enables to establish the following characteristics: structural imbalances, a gap between regional investing priorities and determined priorities, a break in the production chain, an asymmetry in technological development of regional industries, expansion of foreign companies on the domestic market, incompatibility between the system of institutions and the aims of social and economic development of regions.The research paper describes the current challenges for regional development, such as deepening of regional differences in creating tensions in regional labour markets; intensification of migration processes; growing differences in the intensity of structural changes; reducing foreign investment; institutional and fiscal decentralization; growing problems in organizing and financing social services; deepening asymmetry in the development of cross-border infrastructure, which requires a system of protection against increasing threats to economic security.A range of methodological approaches to assessing the level of economic security is generalized. A set of quantitative and qualitative indicators is suggested for evaluating the results of security assurance activities at all levels of the hierarchy: a region, a territorial community, a business enterprise, a person.The priority areas of administrative activity designed to prevent threats to economic security are identified. Given the current challenges, these priority areas include: structural reform of the economy, an increasing backbone role of state-owned entrepreneurship, inter-regional and inter-municipal cooperation, modernization of social safety in terms of personal security, strengthening safety of entrepreneurship, reinforcement of security of local communities under conditions of political, administrative, financial, fiscal, economic and environmental decentralization.The main characteristics of each area are pointed out. Further research studies are to be undertaken to empirically examine the results of these measures and identify barriers for institutional assurance of economic security.

Consensus Toward a Northeast Asian Economic Community

The Northeast Asia Economic Forum (NEAEF) is a regional nongovernmental organization created in 1991 to sponsor and facilitate research, networking, and dialogue relevant to the economic and social development of Northeast Asia. The Forum is also committed to promoting understanding and relations among the peoples of Northeast Asia, North America, and Europe. NEAEF’s main objective is to conduct research and conference activities aimed at functional economic cooperation such as cross-border energy, transportation and logistics infrastructure development, and capital mobilization. The Forum holds annual conferences, workshops, and seminars for planning, facilitating, coordinating, and implementing international and interdisciplinary solutions to common policy problems. It is the only nongovernmental regional organization in which all the nations of Northeast Asia and the US are consistent and active participants. For the year 2016, NEAEF in collaboration with the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP), carried out activities aimed at building a Northeast Asian economic community. NEAEF has established the basis of a strong network for functional cooperation, for example, regular discussions among stakeholders on financing cross border infrastructure development. For the year 2016, the goal was to take more concrete steps toward a Northeast Asian economic community including efforts to increase dialogue with North Korea, with a view to future functional cooperation. NEAEF has continued to maintain a cooperative networking approach and exchanges with North Korea regarding the Tumen River Area and North Korean special economic zones. This year’s volume titled, Consensus Toward a Northeast Asian Economic Community presents the results of a project implemented in 2016 that includes the planning meeting discussions as well as the presentations and summaries of the 2016 NEAEF Annual Conference in Changchun, China.

“Silk Road Economic Belt” in the Context of Relations Between China and Russia

The establishment of “Silk Road Economic Belt” in China, the task to revive the historic trade route between Europe and Asia. In the process of this project, China and Russia have a broad space for cooperation. For example, in the field of trade and economic cooperation, cross-border infrastructure development and expansion of bilateral trade and investment, deepen financial cooperation, promote high-technology cooperation in the field of education, strengthen the Sino-Russian energy cooperation, expansion of industrial and agricultural cooperation. At the same time both sides consider the Russian integration project - the Eurasian Economic Union and Chinese - “The economic belt of the new Silk Road” are not rival, but complementary structures.

Financing for Regional Economic Integration for Northeast Asia III: A Multilateral Financial Institution for Northeast Asia

The Northeast Asian region is one of the most dynamic economic centers of the world, having China, Japan, and Korea as major players, with productive linkages to resource-rich Russia and Mongolia, and to the Pacific and North America. In contrast to the region’s robust economic growth, regional security has long been fragile, mainly due to the geopolitical conditions resulting from the Cold War era. In the twenty-first century, if the countries in Northeast Asia wish to further their development and prosperity, they will have to learn to harness their dynamic economies and create a region in which peaceful coexistence and common prosperity prevail. North Korea, Mongolia, the Russian Far East, and the northeastern provinces of China constitute a northern sub-region that is well-endowed with latent natural and human resources. This sub-region has the potential of becoming a valuable source of natural resources for the entire region, and what is needed is to realize that potential through cross border infrastructure development. Energy security and efficiency, the environment, and green growth, for example, constitute an important area of cooperation, as the three major countries of China, Japan and Korea are heavily dependent on energy imports and are highly vulnerable to energy crises. Financing requirements for the necessary cross-border infrastructure are likely to be large, and a regional financial institution is a key to meeting that financing need. This volume, which is the third in the series of volumes entitled, Financing for Regional Economic Integration for Northeast Asia, comprises papers, research reports, and summaries of a main conference and several specialized meetings, as well as affiliated activities, that took place under this project. The results of this project represent activities contributing to the regional economic integration and have been carried out in a spirit of cooperation.

Trends in National and Regional Investors Financing Crossborder Infrastructure Projects in Asia

This study examines a range of cross-border infrastructure development issues related to the Asian countries. Despite active pursuit of private investment in infrastructure by most developing countries in Asia and a growing number of success stories, the pace of such investment remains slow. Participation by the private sector in infrastructure development has been mixed. While there has been moderate progress in national infrastructure development by the private sector, progress is rather limited in the case of development of cross-border infrastructure in Asia. This study documents that Asian countries have attracted higher private sector investment for the development of national infrastructure projects such as seaports and airports as compared to cross-border infrastructure projects. The rising trend among private investors in infrastructure projects indicates a decline of investments by developed country investors. One of the findings of this study is that cross-border energy projects have received greater private sector investment globally as compared to transport, telecommunication, and water projects. In the context of Asia, too, energy sector projects still dominate the investment scenario. By considering all modes of financing, this study finds that cross-border infrastructure financing in Asia has witnessed an upward trend in the last decade and a half. Aside from hydropower projects in Bhutan, cross-border infrastructure in Asia is pursued through public-private partnerships. Interestingly, these few cross-border projects in Asia have limited private sector investors, compared to other regions, despite a wide base of local investors in Asia. This paper also shows that public sector investment drives cross-border energy and transportation projects in Asia, whereas private sector investments have picked up the pace only recently, specifically after the 1997 Asian financial crisis. This study recommends that given the huge infrastructure investment needs of the region and insufficient government resources, the role of the private sector and public-private partnerships in enhancing infrastructure facilities in Asia is very crucial. A review of select case studies of cross-border infrastructure projects clearly indicates that the major reasons for slow progress of regional infrastructure development by private sector stem from both economic to non-economic issues that need to be addressed in order to promote seamless Asia.

New regionalism in Southern Africa? Between South African hegemony and globalisation

This article describes and explains the process of regionalism in Southern Africa. In doing so, it argues that although the new regionalism has come to mark the on-going regional integration process, traces of the old regionalism are still to be found at work in the region. The new regionalism expresses itself through the increasing role of multinational corporations and their investments in cross-border infrastructure development projects located in development corridors, a role previously played exclusively by the state. The new regionalism is expected to deepen the levels of integration in the region and lead to the birth of a common regional agenda that is likely to enable the region to effectively respond to the challenges posed by globalisation. However, the pursuit of the interests of the South African state and its multinationals have often been found to be at variance with those of its neighbouring states, and this has created widespread resentment of what is perceived as South Africa’s intention to dominate the region.